Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention

Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention Noriko Yamagishi, Norberto Eiji Nawa, Shota Isomura This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 06 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in BMC Psychology → Version 1 posted 6 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background Gratitude interventions have shown various psychological benefits, including enhanced motivation in academic settings. However, their impact on work engagement - a key factor in employee well-being and organizational performance - remains underexplored. This study examined whether a 12-day online gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement and increases awareness of job resources, based on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model. Methods A total of 100 Japanese employees (mean age = 41.0 ± 5.2 years, evenly split by gender) were randomly assigned to a gratitude journal group or a daily life journal group (control). Participants in the gratitude journal group recorded things they felt grateful for, while the control group documented daily occurrences. Work engagement was assessed using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), alongside measures of work motivation, gratitude disposition, perspective-taking, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being. Journal entries were analyzed using word frequency and correspondence analysis to examine whether gratitude journaling enhanced awareness of job resources. Results Participants in the gratitude journal group exhibited a significant increase in work engagement (total score and absorption dimension) post-intervention, supporting the idea that gratitude journaling enhances engagement. Journal content analysis revealed that gratitude journaling was associated with greater recognition of job resources, such as social support, suggesting a mechanism through which gratitude influences work engagement. Both groups showed increases in gratitude disposition, life satisfaction, and competitive-oriented work motivation, suggesting possible broader journaling benefits. In contrast, the daily life journal group experienced temporary declines in purpose in life and autonomy. Conclusions This study provides experimental evidence that gratitude journaling enhances work engagement by increasing awareness of job resources, integrating gratitude into the JD-R Model. The findings suggest that gratitude must be actively cultivated rather than assumed to arise naturally. Given its accessibility and low cost, gratitude journaling offers a promising tool for organizations to foster employee engagement. Future research should examine its long-term effects and evaluate its applicability across diverse cultural contexts. Gratitude Work Engagement Gratitude Journaling Online Intervention Psychological Assessment Text Analysis Job Demands-Resources Model Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Background As a key component of positive psychology ( 1 ), the benefits of gratitude have been extensively studied across various domains, including subjective well-being ( 2 ), social interactions ( 3 , 4 ), and health outcomes ( 5 ). Gratitude has been shown to promote positive emotions, strengthen social bonds, and even improve physical health by reducing harmful behaviors and stress. Recently, there has been growing interest in understanding how gratitude influences motivation, as it is a critical driver of success across different contexts. Research suggests that gratitude plays a significant role in enhancing motivation. For example, Nawa and Yamagishi (2021) found that gratitude interventions improved academic motivation among university students, indicating that focusing on gratitude may be crucial for enhancing success in academic settings ( 6 ). Similarly, studies with children and adolescents have shown that gratitude interventions lead to improvements in positive affect ( 7 ), which is closely linked to increased intrinsic motivation ( 8 ). For working adults, motivation often translates into work engagement, a crucial concept that represents a positive and fulfilling state of mind toward work ( 9 ). Engaged employees experience an energetic and effective connection with their work activities, leading to sustained effort and enthusiasm ( 10 ). While work motivation alone may not directly enhance work performance, its impact is often mediated by work engagement, highlighting the critical role of engagement in achieving better outcomes ( 11 ). Previous studies have shown that high levels of work engagement are associated with improved psychological well-being, better health, and organizational benefits, including increased productivity and lower turnover rates ( 12 , 13 ). Given the importance of work engagement for both employees and organizations, understanding the role of gratitude in fostering engagement at work has emerged as a key area of research. One theoretical framework that helps explain how gratitude may foster work engagement is the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model ( 9 , 14 , 15 ). It identifies two key factors that positively impact work engagement: job resources (e.g., autonomy, social support, colleagues’ support, supervisory coaching) and personal resources (e.g., optimism, self-esteem). Interventions targeting job resources typically focus on improving physical, social, or organizational aspects of the job, such as development opportunities, social capital, and coworker support. Meanwhile, interventions targeting personal resources aim to enhance self-efficacy, resilience, or optimism ( 16 ). This study proposes a new way to enhance job resources - through gratitude (Fig. 1 ). When individuals engage in gratitude-focused practices, such as keeping a gratitude journal, they actively reflect on positive experiences in their daily lives ( 6 ). These reflections may include recognizing help from colleagues, support from family members, or opportunities to engage in meaningful tasks. Through this process, individuals may develop a heightened awareness and appreciation of their existing job resources, such as social support, supervisory guidance, and task variety. From a psychological perspective, this process aligns with Self-Determination Theory ( 17 ), which identifies three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For example, decision-making opportunities promote autonomy, giving employees a greater sense of control over their work; feedback from supervisors fosters learning, which enhances job competence; and support from colleagues and supervisors strengthens relatedness, fostering a sense of connection and belonging. By enhancing the intrinsic motivational role of job resources, gratitude interventions may strengthen employees’ perceptions of their available resources, thereby boosting work engagement. Empirical evidence supports this proposed link between gratitude and engagement. Previous studies have found positive correlations between gratitude and work engagement. Nicuta ( 18 ) reported that teachers with higher gratitude disposition experienced greater work engagement and lower burnout. Similarly, Komase ( 19 , 20 ) found that feeling appreciated at work and workplace-wide gratitude (measured as the average gratitude level of employees) were associated with higher engagement, particularly in supportive environments. These findings suggest that gratitude - whether expressed individually or embedded in organizational culture - may contribute to greater engagement at work. However, despite these correlations, a causal relationship between gratitude and work engagement has not yet been established. Most research relies on cross-sectional designs, making it difficult to determine whether gratitude directly enhances engagement or whether engaged employees simply experience more gratitude. Komase ( 21 ) conducted a pre-post gratitude intervention where employees attended a one-time workshop and were instructed to express gratitude via email three times a week. However, the study found no significant changes in work engagement. Because the intervention lacked a control group, it remains unclear whether the absence of an effect was due to the intervention’s ineffectiveness or external unmeasured factors. Additionally, since participation was voluntary and unpaid, selection bias may have influenced the findings, as highly motivated employees may have been more likely to take part. Despite these efforts, few studies have employed rigorous experimental designs to test the effects of gratitude interventions on work engagement. The present study seeks to address this gap by conducting a controlled gratitude intervention among working adults. Previous research with university students have shown that focusing on grateful events in general, i.e., not limited to experiences directly associated with their academic activities, improved students’ overall academic motivation ( 6 ). Building on such findings, we invited participants to keep a gratitude journal where they could record anything they felt grateful for, not limited to work-related experiences. This inclusive approach allowed for a more comprehensive understanding of gratitude’s potential effects. Participants in the control group, in contrast, were asked to keep a journal of their daily life activities. By comparing outcomes between these groups, this study aims to examine whether gratitude interventions enhance work engagement by increasing the perception and utilization of job resources, in line with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model. Contributions of this study This study contributes to both theory and practice by extending existing research on gratitude and work engagement. Theoretically, it integrates gratitude into the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model, proposing a new mechanism through which gratitude enhances work engagement by strengthening the perception of job resources. This novel perspective builds on Broaden-and-Build Theory ( 22 ) by exploring gratitude’s role in workplace motivation. Practically, this study provides experimental evidence for gratitude journaling as a simple, cost-effective intervention to enhance work engagement, which could inform organizational well-being programs. Furthermore, by employing a controlled intervention design, this study addresses a critical gap in the literature, as prior findings have been predominantly correlational rather than causal. Research Objectives The present study is guided by the following research objectives: Objective 1 To measure work engagement before and after a 12-day gratitude journal intervention, using a control group that keeps a daily life journal, in a sample of Japanese employees. Objective 2 To compare the effects of journaling on work engagement across groups and time points. Objective 3 To examine functional differences between gratitude and daily life journal entries in relation to increased perception of job resources. Hypotheses Based on the JD-R framework and previous research on gratitude, this study tests the following hypotheses: H1 . Gratitude interventions will lead to increased work engagement compared to a control condition. H2 . The effect of gratitude on work engagement will be mediated by increased awareness and recognition of job resources. While the primary focus of this study was to examine the impact of gratitude interventions on work engagement, additional psychological measures were included to explore the broader effects of gratitude and ensure pre-intervention comparability between groups. These measures were chosen based on theoretical and empirical considerations: Work Motivation was included to test whether the gratitude intervention influenced work-related motivation, given that a previous study with college students have shown that gratitude interventions improve academic motivation ( 6 ). This allowed us to explore whether similar effects extend to workplace settings. Gratitude Disposition was assessed for two purposes: ( 1 ) to ensure no pre-existing differences in gratitude disposition between the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups at the pre-intervention stage, and ( 2 ) to examine whether trait gratitude changed following the 12-day intervention, as it directly reflects the study’s target construct. Although gratitude is generally considered a stable trait, previous studies have demonstrated that gratitude interventions can lead to increases in gratitude scores ( 23 ). Additionally, gratitude disposition has been shown to have a positive relationship with work engagement ( 24 ), suggesting that changes in work engagement may be accompanied by shifts in gratitude disposition. Perspective Taking (PT) was included in this study as a secondary outcome, based on Fredrickson’s Broaden-and-Build Theory ( 22 ), which suggests that positive emotions, including gratitude, expand cognitive and social perspectives. Since gratitude fosters openness and awareness of others, it is expected to enhance perspective-taking as gratitude increases. Supporting this, previous research has demonstrated a positive correlation between gratitude and PT ( 25 ). However, the direction of this relationship remains unclear. Thus, we measured PT to examine whether a gratitude intervention causally enhances empathic perspective-taking alongside its effects on work engagement. Life Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being were measured as secondary outcomes to assess whether the gratitude intervention enhanced overall well-being beyond work engagement. Previous studies have reported mixed findings regarding the effects of gratitude interventions on well-being (for a review, see Komase, 2021 ( 26 )). While some studies have found significant improvements ( 27 , 28 ), others have reported no measurable change ( 6 ). However, cross-sectional studies have constantly shown positive associations between gratitude and well-being, with particularly strong associations with certain dimensions of psychological well-being ( 29 ). Based on these findings, we included well-being measures to examine whether gratitude journaling enhances well-being in addition to its potential impact on work engagement. Personality Traits were measured before the intervention to compare the gratitude journal and the control groups. Given the high correlations between certain personality traits and work engagement ( 30 ), this measurement ensured that any observed effects of the gratitude intervention on work engagement were not due to personality differences. Methods Participants This study was conducted as part of the study project of “Well-Living for Well-Being” organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN), Tokyo, Japan. Participants were recruited from a pool of approximately 50,000 individuals registered in the Human Information Database maintained by the NTT DATA Institute of Management Consulting, Inc., Tokyo, Japan. Interested individuals were directed to an online form outlining the study procedures, schedule, eligibility criteria (full-time employment, Japanese workers, working in Japan on weekdays, age between 30 and 49, ability to maintain a journal and respond to questionnaires via smartphone), and the monetary reward (32,000 yen) upon completion. Candidates meeting all requirements were asked to provide their contact information, name, and gender. In adherence to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, candidates opting to participate were required to complete and submit an online consent form. The study received approval from the Shiba Palace Clinic Ethics Review Committee in Tokyo, Japan. An a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power ( 31 , 32 ) for a two-way repeated measures ANOVA (within-between interaction), with power set at 0.80, a medium effect size of 0.25, an alpha error rate of 0.05, two groups, three measurements, a correlation among repeated measures of 0.50, and a nonsphericity correlation value of 0.75. The analysis indicated that a minimum total sample size of 34 participants was required. A total of 100 company employees who met the eligibility criteria, evenly divided between male and female, took part in the study, exceeding the minimum requested sample size. All participant communication, including online forms, assessments, and journaling, was conducted in Japanese. The participants in the experiment came from a wide range of company types, including sales, consulting, IT, manufacturing, logistics, and finance. Their job titles were distributed as follows: general employee (57.14%), supervisor (28.57%), department manager (5.71%), and general manager (8.57%). Out of the 100 participants recruited for the journal intervention experiment, 91 individuals wrote journal entries during the study period (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). Regarding responses to psychological measurements, 74 participants completed the assessment at T1 (just before the intervention) (36 in the gratitude journal group, 38 in the daily life journal group), and 70 individuals completed both T1 and T2 (immediately after the intervention) (35 in each group). All experimental participants were subsequently emailed a delayed follow-up questionnaire at T3 (approximately 1.5 months after the intervention). Of the participants who completed the questionnaires at both T1 and T2, 68 individuals also completed the assessment at T3 (35 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group). Procedure This study was part of a two-month project organized by the CAN, aimed at exploring innovative ways to apply foundational positive psychology research to societal contexts. During this project (October 14th to December 19th, 2022), participants took part in several different studies. The gratitude journal intervention took place over the course of 12 days (October 24th to November 4th, 2022), during which no other experiments were conducted. A few days before the experiment, participants received an email with instructions for accessing a custom-developed web application, including an individual account name and password. They were asked to log in via the provided URL and complete psychological questionnaires (see "Materials" section). Participants were then randomly assigned to either the gratitude journal group (experimental) or the daily life journal group (control) while ensuring a balanced distribution of gender across groups. For 12 days, participants received daily email reminders with a URL to the web application, prompting them to write journal entries via their smartphones. Participants in the gratitude journal group wre instructed to " Please write down at least one thing (ideally around three) you felt grateful for today. If nothing comes to mind, you may recall something you felt grateful for recently (within the past year). " Participants in the daily life journal group were instructed to " Please write down at least one thing (ideally around three) that happened today. " Example entries included expressing gratitude for a colleague’s help (gratitude journal) and describing a visit to a bakery (daily life journal). Each session allowed up to five free-writing spaces, with no limit on daily access. Participants could submit additional entries if desired. Immediately after the 12-day intervention and 1.5 months later, they completed the same psychological scales as those administered at the pre-intervention stage. Materials Work Engagement : Work engagement was assessed using the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)( 33 ), which measures workers' positive mental states towards their work and is considered the positive counterpart to burnout. The UWES consists of three dimensions: Vigor, Dedication, and Absorption. While these dimensions can be analyzed separately, the UWES manual recommends using the total score when focusing on overall work engagement, due to the high intercorrelations observed among the three dimensions ( 34 ). Our correlation analyses confirmed this pattern (Vigor-Dedication r = .856, Vigor-Absorption r = .782, and Dedication-Absorption r = .866, p < .001), consistent with the values reported in the UWES manual ( 34 ). Based on this, we primarily used the total UWES scores to examine the effect of gratitude journaling on overall work engagement, as our focus was on engagement as a unified construct rather than its components. We used the Japanese version of the UWES (UWES-J) ( 35 , 36 ), which includes nine items (three per dimension). Participants rated each item (e.g., “At my work, I feel bursting with energy”) on a 7-point scale from 0 (Never) to 6 (Always/Every day). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated good internal consistency (Total alpha = 0.945, Vigor alpha = 0.89, Dedication alpha = 0.87, and Absorption alpha = 0.85). Work Motivation : Work motivation was assessed using the 36-item Work Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations (referred to as WM-J)( 37 ), which was developed specifically for Japanese respondents based on the work motivation scale by Barrick et al. ( 38 ). The WM-J measures four aspects of work motivation: Competitive, Cooperative, Learning, and Accomplishment-Oriented motivation, with each dimension assessed by nine items. Participants rated each item on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated high internal consistency: Competitive alpha = 0.92, Cooperative alpha = 0.90, Learning alpha = 0.93, and Accomplishment-Oriented alpha = 0.91. Gratitude Disposition Gratitude disposition was assessed using the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6) ( 39 ), which measures individuals' tendency to experience gratitude. Participants rated statements such as “I have so much in life to be thankful for” on a 7-point scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The GQ-6 has been translated into Japanese, and its validity has been confirmed for Japanese individuals ( 40 – 42 ). However, Shiraki( 41 ) conducted a factor analysis on the Japanese version and found that the sixth item (“Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone”) had a factor loading lower than 0.4, while the remaining five items showed loadings greater than 0.4, supporting a one-factor structure for the Japanese version. Another study also confirmed this five-item version ( 42 ). Therefore, we excluded the sixth item when assessing participants’ gratitude disposition in this study as well. This scale will be referred to as GQ-J. The Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.87, indicating good internal consistency. Perspective Taking The Perspective Taking (PT) Scale is part of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) ( 43 , 44 ) and assesses individuals’ tendency to adopt others’ perspectives. The original scale consists of seven items, such as “Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in their place,” rated on a 0 to 4 scale (0 = does not describe me well to 4 = describes me very well). In this study, we used the Japanese version ( 45 ), which employs a five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.72. Life Satisfaction The 5-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) ( 46 ) was used to assess participants' overall life satisfaction. The SWLS is widely used as a measure of the cognitive component of subjective well-being ( 47 ). Respondents rated statements such as “In most ways my life is close to my ideal” on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). We employed the Japanese translation of the SWLS available on the website of the original study's first author. Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.89, indicating good internal consistency. Psychological Well-Being : Psychological well-being was assessed using the 42-item version of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) ( 48 ), which measures six dimensions: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, purpose in life, and self-acceptance (7 items each). We used the Japanese translation of the scale ( 49 ). Items were intermixed and rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's alphas in this study were: autonomy = 0.75, environmental mastery = 0.74, personal growth = 0.80, positive relations with others = 0.72, purpose in life = 0.62, and self-acceptance = 0.80, consistent with findings from the Japanese development study( 49 ). Personality Traits : Personality traits were assessed using the Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), a measure of the Big Five personality traits. The NEO-FFI consists of 60 items, with 12 items per dimensions: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. We used the Japanese translation of the NEO-FFI ( 50 ). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was: Neuroticism alpha = 0.88, Extraversion alpha = 0.84, Openness alpha = 0.66, Agreeableness alpha = 0.70, and Conscientiousness alpha = 0.77. Experimental Schedule All psychological measures (UWES/WM-J/GQ-J/PT/SWLS/PWBS/) except NEO-FFI were assessed at three time points to evaluate the effects and persistence of the 12-day journal intervention. Assessments were conducted just before the intervention (T1: October 20th to 23rd ), immediately after the intervention (T2: November 4th to 7th ), and approximately 1.5 months after the intervention (T3: December 21st to 25th ). The NEO-FFI was administered at T1. Participants were informed about the schedule for the three psychological measurements during recruitment. However, they were unaware of the different groups in the journaling experiment and were not informed of the research hypothesis. Analysis methods All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29) unless stated otherwise. Group differences were examined by analyzing the dependent variable using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (rm-ANOVA). Adjustments for degrees of freedom were made using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (Mauchly's sphericity test) as needed. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of less than 0.05. Post-hoc tests were conducted when appropriate and adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni correction if applicable. All textual analyses of journal entry were conducted using KH Coder, a computer software package for quantitative content analyses ( 51 , 52 ). To examine the effects of the gratitude journal intervention, we conducted a two-way repeated measures ANOVA with time (T1, T2, and T3) as the within-subject factor and journal group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) as the between-subject factor for each one of the outcome measures. Results Participants For the statistical analysis of the journal intervention, we included only participants who wrote at least one journal entry during the intervention period and completed the questionnaires at all three timepoints (34 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group). The flow of participants through the study is illustrated in the CONSORT flow diagram ( 53 )(Fig. 2 ). Details regarding the composition of each group are summarized in Table 1 . Table 1 Number of participants by gender and mean age for each one of the groups Gratitude journal Daily life journal Total Age Mean (SD) [range] Female Male Sub-total Female Male Sub-total Enrollment 25 25 50 25 25 50 100 40.97(5.17) [31–49] T1, T2, T3 & Journal entry 19 15 34 15 18 33 67 40.21(5.15) [31–48] Note: SD indicates standard deviation. T1 refers to pre-intervention, T2 to post-intervention, and T3 to a follow-up at approximately 1.5 months. To be included in the analysis, participants had to complete the questionnaires at T1, T2 and T3, and additionally provide journal entries during the 12-day intervention period. Personality Traits: NEO-FFI We conducted a two-way rm-ANOVA using the mean scores of the five NEO-FFI dimensions from two journal groups to examine potential differences in personality traits at the pre-intervention stage (T1). Group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) served as a between-subjects factor, and personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) were within-subject factors. Results revealed a significant main effect of NEO-FFI traits (F(2.461, 177.219) = 9.393, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.115), with no significant main effect of group (F(1, 72) = 2.280, p = 0.135, η p 2 = 0.031) or interaction between NEO-FFI traits and group (F(2.461, 177.219) = 2.560, p = 0.068, η p 2 = 0.034). These findings suggest no substantive differences in NEO-FFI personality traits between gratitude journal and daily life journal group participants, thus minimizing the potential influence on the gratitude journal intervention outcomes. Mean scores and standard deviations for each trait are detailed by group in Table 2 . Table 2 Mean scores and standard deviations of NEO-FFI traits by group N E O A C Gratitude journal (n = 36) 25.19 (8.31) 24.00 (7.07) 26.67 (5.36) 31.08 (5.97) 29.86 (6.25) Daily life journal (n = 38) 28.26 (9.67) 21.97 (8.00) 26.03 (5.97) 27.18 (5.45) 27.97 (6.03) Note: Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. The abbreviations denote each trait: N for Neuroticism, E for Extraversion, O for Openness, A for Agreeableness, and C for Conscientiousness. Psychological Scales Table 3 summarized the statistical results for all psychological scales examined in this study, including work engagement (UWES), work motivation (WM-J), gratitude (GQ-J), perspective taking (PT), life satisfaction (SWLS), and psychological well-being (PWBS). Table 3 Summary of Statistical Results for Psychological Scales For Time For Group Interaction Psychological Scale F value p value η p 2 F value p value η p 2 F value p value η p 2 Simple main effects Post-hoc tests (Bonferroni correction) UWES Total F(2, 130) = 1.357 0.261 0.020 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.223 0.273 0.018 F(1, 130) = 5.548 0.005 0.079 [For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 4.82, P = 0.010 , η p 2 = 0.069 [For the gratitude journal: Time] T1 (2.807) < T2 (3.141) Vigor F(1.757, 114.220) = 0.383 0.656 0.006 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.273 0.263 0.019 F(1.757, 114.220) = 3.073 0.051 0.047 Dedication F(2, 130) = 0.400 0.671 0.006 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.077 0.303 0.016 F(2, 130) = 4.352 0.015 0.063 Absorption F(2, 130) = 3.456 0.034 0.050 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.058 0.308 0.016 F(2, 130) = 3.176 0.045 0.047 [For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 3.77, P = 0.026 , η p 2 = 0.055 [For the gratitude journal: Time] T1(2.520 < T2(2.922) WM-J Competitive F(2, 130) = 10.264 < .001 0.136 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.037 0.848 0.001 F(2, 130) = 0.041 0.96 0.001 [For Time] T1(2.823) < T2(3.022), T1 < T3(3.154) Cooperative F(2, 130) = 2.117 0.125 0.032 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.872 0.354 0.013 F(2, 130) = 1.603 0.205 0.024 Learning F(1.697, 110.328) = 1.146 0.321 0.017 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.672 0.201 0.025 F(1.697, 110.328) = 0.771 0.446 0.012 Accomplishment-oriented F(2, 130) = 2.287 0.106 0.034 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.366 0.247 0.021 F(2, 130) = 0.872 0.421 0.013 GQ-J F(1.826, 118.711) = 8.825 < 0.001 0.12 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.422 0.518 0.006 [For Time] T1(24.79) < T2(25.88), T1 < T3 (26.45) PT F(2, 130) = 2.212 0.114 0.033 F( 1 , 65 ) = 1.610 0.209 0.024 F(2, 130) = 0.361 0.697 0.006 SWLS F(2, 130) = 5.908 0.004 0.083 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.210 0.649 0.003 F(2, 130) = 0.041 0.960 0.001 [For Time] T1(17.51) < T3(19.07) PWBS Autonomy F(2, 130) = 1.320 0.271 0.020 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.283 0.596 0.004 F(2, 130) = 3.731 0.027 0.054 [For the daily life journal: Time] (F(2, 130) = 4.32, P = 0.015 , η p 2 = 0.06228 [For the daily life journal: Time] T2(31.21) > T3 (29.39) Environmental mastery F(1.793, 116.570) = 0.360 0.699 0.006 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.823 0.368 0.013 F(1.793, 116.570) = 2.367 0.104 0.035 Personal growth F(2, 130) = 0.845 0.432 0.013 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.233 0.631 0.004 F(2, 130) = 1.668 0.193 0.025 Positive relations with others F(1.670, 108.533) = 1.481 0.231 0.022 F( 1 , 65 ) = 3.377 0.071 0.049 F(1.670, 108.533) = 0.321 0.687 0.005 Purpose in life F(1.826, 118.720) = 2.484 0.093 0.037 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.450 0.505 0.007 F(1.826, 118.720) = 6.053 0.004 0.085 [For the daily life journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 5.73, P = 0.004 , η p 2 = 0.081 [For the daily life journal: Time] T1(31.88) > T2(30.64) Self-acceptance F(2, 130) = 0.189 0.828 0.003 F( 1 , 65 ) = 0.196 0.659 0.003 F(2, 130) = 1.565 0.213 0.024 Note: η p ² represents partial eta-squared, a measure of effect size. For simple main effects and post-hoc tests, only significant results are reported, with Bonferroni correction applied at α = 0.05. The following abbreviations denote each psychological scale: UWES (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale), WM-J (Work Motivation Questionnaire for Japanese), GQ-J (Japanese version of the GQ-6, Gratitude Questionnaire), PT (Perspective Taking Scale), SWLS (Satisfaction With Life Scale), and PWBS (Psychological Well-Being Scale). ********** Insert Table 3 around here *********** Below, we describe the key findings, followed by a brief overview of secondary findings. The two-way repeated measures ANOVA on UWES (Total scores) revealed a significant interaction between time and group (F(1, 130) = 5.548, p = 0.005, η p ² = 0.079). Further, in the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant, and post-hoc analyses (Bonferroni corrected at α = 0.05) showed a significant increase in work engagement total scores from T1 to T2 (Fig. 3 ). No significant change was observed in the daily life journal group. A similar pattern was found for UWES Absorption (Fig. 4 , see details in Table 3 ). These findings suggest that gratitude journaling effectively enhances work engagement, supporting Hypothesis 1. Given that the proposed mechanism involves increased awareness and recognition of job resources, we further examined participants’ journal entries to test Hypothesis 2 (see "Journal Entry Contents" section). A significant main effect of time was observed, indicating overall increases in competitive work motivation (WM-J, Fig. 5 ), gratitude (GQ-J, Fig. 6 ), and life satisfaction (SWLS, Fig. 7 ) across participants, regardless of journal type. These results suggest that the act of journaling, regardless of thematic content, may drive certain psychological changes. Interestingly, only the daily life journal group showed a significant decrease in the Purpose in Life dimension of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) from T1 to T2 (Fig. 8 ). This suggests that reflecting on daily events without a gratitude focus may lead to self-focused attention and negative affect. Additionally, a decrease in the Autonomy dimension of PWBS was observed from T2 to T3 in the daily life journal group (Fig. 9 ). This may indicate a delayed effect of journaling, suggesting that writing about daily life experiences could lead to reduced perceptions of self-control or autonomy over time. Further research is needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms. Additional analysis – age and gender In this experiment, participants were aged between 31 and 49 years and were evenly distributed between females and males. To further investigate the influence of age and gender on changes in total UWES scores and the absorption dimension, we conducted a three-way rm-ANOVA with group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) and gender (female vs. male) as between-subject factors, time (T1, T2 and T3) as within-subject factors, and participant age as a covariate. Total UWES scores Results showed that age did not have a significant effect on total UWES scores, F( 1 , 62 ) = 0.486, p = 0.488, η p ² = 0.008, suggesting that differences in age did not systematically modulate intervention effects. Additionally, there was no significant three-way interaction among group, time and gender (F(2, 124) = 2.142, p = 0.122, η p ² = 0.033). However, the interaction between group and time was significant (F(2, 124) = 6.134, p = 0.003, η p ² = 0.090). We further found that for the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant (F( 2 , 61 ) = 5.971, p = 0.004, η p ² = 0.164), with the adjusted score at T2 (3.167) being significantly higher than at T1 (2.804). No significant differences were detected for the daily life journal group (F( 2 , 61 ) = 2.213, p = 0.118, η p ² = 0.068). Together, these results indicate that age and gender did not influence changes in total UWES scores. Absorption Dimension of UWES A similar pattern of results was observed with Absorption dimension of UWES. Results showed that age did not have a significant effect (F( 1 , 62 ) = 0.875, p = 0.353, η p ² = 0.014), and there was no significant three-way interaction among group, time and gender (F(2, 124) = 1.639, p = 0.198, η p ² = 0.026). However, the interaction between group and time was significant (F(2, 124) = 3.443, p = 0.035, η p ² = 0.053). We found that for the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant (F( 2 , 61 ) = 4.184, p = 0.020, η p ² = 0.121), with the adjusted score at T2 (2.961) being significantly higher than at T1 (2.525). No significant differences were detected for the daily life journal group (F( 2 , 61 ) = 2.892, p = 0.063, η p ² = 0.087). Together, these results indicate that age and gender did not influence changes in UWES absorption scores. Journal entry contents To examine Hypothesis 2, which proposes that gratitude interventions enhance awareness and recognition of job resources, we analyzed participants' journal entries using KH Coder ( 51 , 52 ). Unlike the psychological scale results, which are based on participants' self-assessments, this analysis examines the content of their journal reflections by identifying word usage patterns and associations using both word frequency and correspondence analyses. A total of 91 participants wrote journal entries (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). For this analysis, we focused on the journal entry contents of 67 participants (34 in the gratitude group and 33 in the daily life journal group) who provided journal entries during the journal intervention period and completed the psychological measurements at T1, T2, and T3. To provide a descriptive overview of participants' journaling activity, we first examined overall patterns of journal entries. On average, participants in the gratitude journal group wrote on 9.47 days (SD = 2.12, range 4–12) out of 12 days of the intervention. Participants in the daily life journal group were equally compliant, writing on average on 9.64 days (SD = 2.00, range 6–12) during the 12-day intervention. Moreover, on average, gratitude journal participants wrote 1.54 entries per day (SD = 0.88, range 1–8), with each entry containing 44.51 Japanese characters (SD = 23.54, range 4–169). Daily life journal participants wrote 3.06 entries per day (SD = 0.89, range 1–7), with an average length of 28.18 characters (SD = 15.08, range 2–141). Word Frequency Analysis First, we conducted a word frequency analysis to identify the most commonly used words in each journal type (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal). Table 4 presents the ten most frequently used words in each group’s journal entries. Participants in the gratitude journal group typically used words such as "thank you" (114 occurrences), "gratitude" (87), "colleagues" ( 53 ), and "happy" ( 41 ), as well as words related to personal relationship, such as "children" ( 52 ), suggesting an increased tendency to recognize both workplace and personal social connections, along with positive experiences. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group primarily described routine events, with words such as "today" (239), "work" (135), "go" (86), "eat" ( 59 ), and "cold" ( 48 ). These results indicate that gratitude journaling encouraged participants to reflect more on interpersonal and positive resources, while daily life journaling focused more on neutral descriptions of daily activities. Table 4 Top 10 most frequent words in gratitude and daily life journal entries Gratitude journal Daily life journal Word Number of occurrences Word Number of occurrences Thank you 114 Today 239 Gratitude 87 Work 135 Work 71 Go 86 Think 62 Eat 59 Colleagues 53 Cold 48 Children 52 Tomorrow 46 Myself 51 Buy 45 Happy 41 Morning 41 Person 40 Delicious 37 Make 36 Think 37 Note: The total number of words was 4449 for the gratitude journal entries, and 5685 for the daily life journal entries. Correspondence Analysis To further investigate the relationship between journal type and word usage, we conducted a correspondence analysis ( 54 ) based on the words that appeared 20 or more times in either journal. This analysis uses the chi-square distance to quantify the association between words and journal type, with larger absolute values indicating stronger associations. Importantly, it can provide insights on how similarly the words were used by each group. In essence, words are mapped along a single axis, with words that were more commonly used by participants in the gratitude journal group loaded with negative values, words that were more commonly used by the participants in the daily life journal loaded with positive values, and words that appeared in both groups located around the origin of the axis. Table 5 presents the ten most characteristic words for each journal type. The words "thank you" (-1.819), "gratitude" (-1.763), "kind" (-1.705), "colleague" (-1.580), and "daughter" (-1.281) were strongly associated with the gratitude journal group, reinforcing the idea that gratitude journaling enhances recognition of both workplace support and personal relationships, including family connections. In contrast, words such as "cold" (1.386), "today" (1.169), "bad" (1.156), "tomorrow" (1.076), and "sleep" (1.076), were uniquely associated with the daily life journal, reflecting a greater focus on daily experiences and physical states rather than interpersonal relationships. These results provide strong evidence that gratitude journaling facilitates a cognitive shift toward recognizing and appreciating available job resources, supporting Hypothesis 2. Table 5 Top 10 words most strongly associated with the gratitude and daily life journal groups based on correspondence analysis results Gratitude journal Daily life journal Word Chi-square distance Word Chi-square distance Thank you -1.819 Cold 1.386 Gratitude -1.763 Done 1.351 Kind -1.705 Today 1.169 Colleague -1.580 Bad 1.156 Be saved -1.563 Tomorrow 1.076 Help -1.548 Sleep 1.076 Correspondence -1.383 Use 1.070 Daughter -1.281 Walk 1.070 Tell -1.259 Night 1.042 Myself -1.218 Lunch 0.948 Note: Positive chi-square distances reflect stronger association with the daily life journal group, while negative distances reflect stronger association with the gratitude journal group. Discussion Summary of Key Findings This study investigated the effects of a 12-day gratitude journaling intervention on the work engagement of Japanese employees. As predicted, participants in the gratitude journal group experienced significant increases in work engagement scores (total and absorption dimension) after the intervention, supporting Hypothesis 1. These effects remained significant even after controlling for age and gender, suggesting that the observed benefits were not due to demographic factors. Furthermore, Hypothesis 2 was supported through an analysis of participants’ journal entries. Word frequency and correspondence analyses revealed that gratitude journaling facilitated a cognitive shift toward recognizing and appreciating job resources, particularly in the form of interpersonal relationships (e.g., colleagues' support, acts of kindness). This provides evidence that gratitude interventions may enhance work engagement by increasing awareness of available job resources, in line with the Job Demands-Resources Model. Theoretical Contributions The current findings support the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model by demonstrating that gratitude can serve as a psychological trigger for recognizing and utilizing existing job resources. While the JD-R model highlights job resources such as colleague support, autonomy, and supervisory guidance as key drivers of work engagement, our findings suggest that gratitude interventions can enhance employees' awareness of these resources. By regularly reflecting on gratitude, individuals may become more attuned to the support, opportunities, and resources already available in their work environment, thereby increasing their engagement. Additionally, our findings extend the JD-R Model by showing that gratitude journaling does not only heighten awareness of work-related job resources but also broadens perceptions of social support beyond the workplace. In the gratitude journal group, participants frequently wrote about support from family members, highlighting a more generalized awareness of social resources. This aligns with Fredrickson’s Broaden-and-Build Theory, which suggests that positive emotions - such as gratitude - broaden individuals' cognitive perspectives, leading them to recognize more resources in their environment. In this case, gratitude journaling appears to help employees recognize not only their workplace support system but also their personal social network. Prior research with university students similarly found that gratitude interventions improved academic motivation, even when students primarily wrote about gratitude toward friends and family rather than school-related experiences. The current findings extend this evidence to a workplace setting, suggesting that a broader awareness of social support - both professional and personal - may contribute to increased work engagement. Beyond theoretical alignment, this study also provides causal evidence supporting the role of gratitude in enhancing work engagement. While previous studies have found positive correlations between gratitude and engagement, most relied on cross-sectional data, making it difficult to determine whether gratitude actively increases engagement or simply coexists with it. By implementing a controlled intervention, we confirm that gratitude is not just an outcome of engagement but a mechanism that actively enhances it by reinforcing awareness of social support. Secondary Findings Beyond enhancements in work engagement in the gratitude journal group, negative effects were observed in the daily life journal group regarding psychological well-being, particularly in the dimensions of purpose in life and autonomy. Participants in the daily life journal group experienced a decline in purpose in life scores immediately after the intervention (T2 < T1). One possible explanation is that writing about daily events, without a specific focus on gratitude, may have led participants to adopt a more self-focused perspective. Previous research suggests that increased self-focused attention is associated with negative affect, particularly when it emphasizes personal concerns and shortcomings ( 55 ). In fact, self-focus has been linked to depressive symptoms, especially when it involves rumination on daily difficulties rather than positive reflections ( 56 ). Additionally, correspondence analysis of journal entries revealed that negative words, such as cold and bad, were more frequently used in the daily life journal group. This suggests that participants may have experienced a shift toward self-focus and negative emotional processing, potentially contributing to the observed decline in purpose in life scores. Although journaling is often considered beneficial for mental health ( 57 ), these findings indicate that its effects depend on the content and focus of the writing. This highlights the importance of structured journaling interventions, where emphasizing positive aspects, such as gratitude, may help mitigate unintended negative effects. In addition to the changes observed in purpose in life, participants in the daily life journal group also experienced declines in autonomy scores at the follow-up measurement (T3 < T2). This suggests that the effects of journaling on perceived autonomy may extend beyond the immediate intervention period and can involve delayed cognitive or emotional processes ( 58 ). One possible explanation is that while daily life journaling initially provided a structured means of self-reflection, its cessation may have led to a diminished sense of self-directed control over time. Another possibility, as discussed above, is that the non-specific nature of daily life journaling may have encouraged excessive self-focus during the intervention. If participants became accustomed to actively reflecting on their daily experiences, the removal of this structured reflection could have created a psychological shift, making them feel less in control of their thoughts or self-regulation. The decrease in autonomy might reflect a reduced sense of agency, as participants no longer had an intentional framework for processing their experiences. Future research should systematically vary the focus of journaling to examine its potential effects on autonomy. Interestingly, both gratitude and daily life journaling also shared some psychological benefits. Specifically, participants in both groups experienced increases in the competitive-oriented dimension of work motivation (WM-J), gratitude disposition (GQ-J), and life satisfaction (SWLS). These results suggest that while the specific focus of journaling shapes distinct psychological outcomes, the act of journaling itself may serve as a broadly beneficial reflective practice. Journaling encourages self-awareness by prompting individuals to consciously reflect on their internal states and social interactions ( 59 ). This reflective process aligns with gratitude theories, which emphasize recognizing benefits received from others ( 2 ), potentially explaining the observed increase in both GQ-J and SWLS scores across both groups. Additionally, the structured nature of journaling may facilitate reflective thinking and goal-setting, helping individuals identify gaps between their current and desired states. This process fosters behavioral changes, including greater effort and improved self-regulation ( 60 , 61 ), which are essential for competitive-oriented motivation. These findings highlight journaling’s dual role: as a general tool for self-reflection and as a targeted intervention shaped by its focus. Gratitude journaling, emphasizing positive recognition, may be particularly effective for enhancing work engagement, while daily life journaling offers broader but less specific and mixed benefits. Future research should explore ways to optimize different journaling approaches for diverse populations and workplace settings. Practical Implications The findings of this study highlight the importance of cultivating gratitude as a deliberate practice in workplace settings. The absence of words such as thank you or gratitude in the daily life journal group suggests that expressing gratitude does not occur naturally for many individuals - it must be intentionally fostered. Given that gratitude journaling significantly improved work engagement, organizations seeking to enhance employee motivation and well-being may benefit from implementing structured gratitude interventions as part of their workplace culture. One key insight from this study is that gratitude does not need to be restricted to work-related experiences to positively impact work engagement. Participants in the gratitude journal group frequently reflected on not only workplace relationships but also personal support systems, such as family members. This suggests that recognizing gratitude across different aspects of life may enhance overall psychological resources, which in turn strengthens engagement at work. Companies that integrate gratitude-focused well-being programs should encourage employees to reflect on gratitude holistically, rather than limiting it to professional interactions. Ultimately, this study demonstrates that gratitude is a powerful, low-cost intervention with the potential to boost employee engagement, strengthen workplace relationships, and contribute to a positive organizational culture. Future research should explore how different gratitude-based interventions can be adapted to various work environments, as well as how long-lasting these effects may be over time. Limitations and Future Directions While this study provides valuable insights into how gratitude interventions enhance work engagement, several limitations should be considered. First, the control group wrote about daily life events without being explicitly directed to focus on mental or emotional content, whereas the gratitude journal group reflected on gratitude-related experiences. Although both groups followed similar procedures, this key difference in focus may have influenced the degree of introspection and recognition of job resources. Future research should explore whether the benefits observed in work engagement are unique to gratitude journaling or whether other forms of reflective writing ( 62 ), such as positive journaling ( 63 ), could yield similar effects. This would help determine whether deliberate attention to gratitude is essential for increasing engagement or if a broader reflective practice could also enhance job resources. Second, differences in writing patterns between groups may have influenced outcomes. Participants in the gratitude journal group tended to write fewer entries per day (1.54 on average), but with longer average length (44.51 Japanese characters per entry), suggesting a deeper level of reflection. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group wrote more frequent entries (3.06 per day), but each entry was shorter on average (28.18 characters), potentially reflecting a more surface-level approach to the journaling task. While we did not formally assess depth of content, these patterns raise the possibility that the amount and quality of reflection differed between groups, which could have influenced psychological outcomes. Future studies should consider standardizing journaling instructions (e.g., specifying the number of entries and suggested character length) to ensure comparable writing effort across groups, which could help isolate the specific effects of the gratitude intervention. Third, all participants were Japanese employees, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Cultural differences, particularly in how gratitude and daily reflections are perceived, could influence the results. Previous research has shown that the frequency and intensity of experiencing gratitude can vary across cultures, and these differences are associated with factors such as self-esteem, loneliness, and perceived stress ( 64 ). This suggests that the effects of keeping a gratitude journal might lead to different emotional outcomes across cultural groups. Future studies should replicate this research in diverse cultural settings to better understand how these findings translate across different populations Fourth, the relatively narrow age range of participants (30–49 years, mean age 41) may influence how gratitude journaling affects work engagement. This limited age range could affect the robustness of the findings, as the effects of gratitude journaling might differ across age groups. Previous research has suggested that the disposition to feel gratitude changes with age, with younger and middle-aged individuals typically showing lower levels of gratitude, and older adults exhibiting higher levels ( 65 ). Therefore, the impact of keeping a gratitude journal may vary across different age groups. In this study, the participants were not divided into age groups for analysis, which may have overlooked potential age-related differences. Future research should aim to include a broader age range, including participants in their 20s and 50s, and analyze the data separately by age group to determine whether the effects of gratitude-focused practices differ across generations in the workplace. Finally, it remains an open question how the results might differ if the effects of gratitude on work engagement were assessed using methods other than self-report scales. Self-report measures are prone to biases, such as social desirability or the tendency to respond in ways that maintain a positive self-concept ( 66 , 67 ). To more comprehensively assess the impact of gratitude journaling on work engagement, future research should consider incorporating additional measures. One potential approach could be to track work performance indicators that may reflect levels of work engagement. For example, a recent study found that work performance was significantly associated with cognitive functions such as attention, executive functioning, and working memory among general workers ( 68 ). This suggests that cognitive performance tests could be used as more objective measures, alongside traditional metrics such as productivity rates, task completion accuracy, sales performance, presenteeism, absenteeism rates, and performance evaluations conducted by supervisors. Combining such data with self-report measures would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how gratitude interventions influence employees’ work engagement and overall job performance Conclusions This study provides experimental evidence that a simple gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement by increasing awareness and recognition of job resources, supporting the Job Demands-Resources Model and Broaden-and-Build Theory. The findings suggest that gratitude does not naturally arise in everyday reflections but must be actively cultivated, offering practical implications for workplace interventions. Given its low-cost, scalable nature, gratitude journaling may serve as an accessible tool for fostering engagement, well-being, and positive work culture. Future research should explore long-term effects, cross-cultural applications, and objective performance outcomes to further establish its effectiveness in diverse work settings. Abbreviations GQ-J Japanese version of the Gratitude Questionnaire NEO-FFI Neuroticism-Extraversion-Openness Inventory Five-Factor Inventory PT Perspective Taking Scale PWBS Psychological Well-Being Scale rm-ANOVA repeated measures analysis of variance SD Standard deviation SWLS Satisfaction With Life Scale UWES Utrecht Work Engagement Scale WM-J Work Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Shiba Palace Clinic, Tokyo, Japan that is working under the authorization of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. All participants submitted an online consent form before taking part in the experiments, in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent for publication Not applicable Availability of data and materials The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interest No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Funding This study was partially funded with a grant from the Ritsumeikan Inamori Philosophy Research Center to NY and NEN. It was conducted as part of the "Well-Living for Well-Being" study project organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN) foundation. JMA Management Center Inc., Tokyo, Japan, provided partial support for this project through CAN activity. The funder and the supporter had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Authors’ contribution NY and NEN conceived the study, and NY, NEN and SI designed the experiment. SI acquired the data. NY performed the statistical analyses and wrote the manuscript with inputs from NEN and SI. All authors have approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgments We are grateful to A. Hirano and R. Ito for their assistance with statistical analyses and technical support, and to I. Hagiwara and H. Hosono for their helpful advice and encouragement throughout this project. References Seligman ME, Steen TA, Park N, Peterson C. Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. Am Psychol. 2005;60(5):410–21. Emmons RA, McCullough ME. Counting blessings versus burdens: an experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(2):377–89. Algoe SB, Dwyer PC, Younge A, Oveis C. A new perspective on the social functions of emotions: Gratitude and the witnessing effect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020;119(1):40–74. Algoe SB, Chandler KR. Experienced gratitude is a catalyst for upward spirals of perceived partner responsiveness. Curr Opin Psychol. 2024;55:101764. Wang K, Rees VW, Dorison CA, Kawachi I, Lerner JS. The role of positive emotion in harmful health behavior: Implications for theory and public health campaigns. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024;121(28):e2320750121. Nawa NE, Yamagishi N. Enhanced academic motivation in university students following a 2-week online gratitude journal intervention. BMC Psychol. 2021;9(1):71. Froh JJ, Kashdan TB, Ozimkowski KM, Miller N. Who benefits the most from a gratitude intervention in children and adolescents? Examining positive affect as a moderator. J Posit Psychol. 2009;4(5):408–22. Pekrun R, Goetz T, Titz W, Perry RP. Positive emotions in education. In: Frydenberg E, editor. Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions, and challenges. Oxford University Press; 2002. pp. 149–73. Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organizational Behav. 2004;25:293–315. Shimazu A, Schaufeli WB. Work engagement: an emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Biosci Trends. 2008;2(1):2. Firgan Lussa M, Sudiro A, Dwi Vata Hapsari R. The effect of work motivation and work environment on employee performance through work engagement. J Res Bus Social Sci. 2023;12(9):134–43. Simpson MR. Engagement at work: a review of the literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(7):1012–24. Ofei-Dodoo S, Long MC, Bretches M, Kruse BJ, Haynes C, Bachman C. Work engagement, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions among family medicine residency program managers. Int J Med Educ. 2020;11:47–53. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. The Job Demands-Resources model: state of the art. J Managerial Psychol. 2007;22(3):309–28. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. Towards a model of work engagement. Career Dev Int. 2008;13(3):209–23. Knight C, Patterson M, Dawson J. Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. J Organ Behav. 2017;38(6):792–812. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;55(1):68–78. Nicuta EG, Diaconu-Gherasim LR, Constantin T. How trait gratitude relates to teachers' burnout and work engagement: job demands and resources as mediators. Curr Psychol. 2022:1–10. Komase Y, Watanabe K, Sasaki N, Kawakami N. The Effect of Perceived Gratitude From Others on Work Engagement: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2021;63(9):e592–5. Komase Y, Akiyama H, Kawakami N. Effects of the Collective Gratitude on Work Engagement: A Multilevel Cross-sectional Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2022;64(11):e729–35. Komase Y, Watanabe K, Imamura K, Kawakami N. Effects of a Newly Developed Gratitude Intervention Program on Work Engagement Among Japanese Workers: A Pre- and Posttest Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2019;61(9):e378–83. Fredrickson BL, Branigan C. Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Cogn Emot. 2005;19(3):313–32. Hollingsworth JC, Redden DT. Tiny Habits((R)) for Gratitude-Implications for Healthcare Education Stakeholders. Front Public Health. 2022;10:866992. Komase Y, Watanabe K, Sasaki N, Kawakami N. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Gratitude at Work Scale (GAWS). J Occup Health. 2020;62(1):e12185. Ikeda H. Gratitude in Organizations: Its Function via Expression and Sharing in the Workplace. Trans Acad Association Organizational Sci. 2015;4(1):120–5. Komase Y, Watanabe K, Hori D, Nozawa K, Hidaka Y, Iida M, et al. Effects of gratitude intervention on mental health and well-being among workers: A systematic review. J Occup Health. 2021;63(1):e12290. Cunha LF, Pellanda LC, Reppold CT. Positive Psychology and Gratitude Interventions: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Front Psychol. 2019;10:584. Czyzowska N, Gurba E. Enhancing Meaning in Life and Psychological Well-Being Among a European Cohort of Young Adults via a Gratitude Intervention. Front Psychol. 2021;12:751081. Nawa NE, Yamagishi N. Distinct associations between gratitude, self-esteem, and optimism with subjective and psychological well-being among Japanese individuals. BMC Psychol. 2024;12(1):130. Fukuzaki T, Iwata N. Association between the five-factor model of personality and work engagement: a meta-analysis. Ind Health. 2022;60(2):154–63. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149–60. Schaufeli WB, Salanova M, González-Romá V, Bakker AB. The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Happiness Studies: Interdisciplinary Forum Subjective Well-Being. 2002;3(1):71–92. Schaufeli WB. B. BA. UTRECHT Work Engagement Scale (UWES) - Test Manuals2003. Available from: https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/tests/#engagement Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB, Salanova M. The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educ Psychol Meas. 2006;66(4):701–16. Shimazu A, Schaufeli WB, Kosugi S, Suzuki A, Nashiwa H, Kato A, et al. Work engagement in Japan: Validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Appl Psychology: Int Rev. 2008;57(3):510–23. Ikeda H, Morinaga Y. Developing a Measure of Multi-faceted Work Motivations in Japanese Organizations. Japanese Association Industrial/Organizational Psychol J. 2017;30(2):171–86. Barrick MR, Stewart GL, Piotrowski M. Personality and job performance: test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales representatives. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87(1):43–51. McCullough ME, Emmons RA, Tsang JA. The grateful disposition: a conceptual and empirical topography. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002;82(1):112–27. Sumi K. Reliability and Construct Validity of the Gratitude Questionnaire 6 Item Form (GQ 6) in a Sample of Japanese College Students. J Posit Psychol Wellbeing. 2017;1(2):73–84. Shiraki Y. Development of the Japanese version of the trait gratitude scale. Japanese J Interpers social Psychol. 2014;14:27–33. Kobayashi F. Development and validation of the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ) in Japanese undergraduate students. Comp Cult J Miyazaki Int Coll. 2013;18:2–19. Davis MH. A Multidimensional Approach to Individual Differences in Empathy. JSAS Catalog Sel Documents Psychol. 1980;10:85. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1983;44(1):113–26. Himichi T, Osanai H, Goto T, Fujita H, Kawamura Y, et al. Development of a Japanese version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Japanese J Psychol. 2017;88(1):61–71. Diener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess. 1985;49(1):71–5. Diener E. Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull. 1984;95(3):542–75. Ryff CD. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1989;57(6):1069–81. Ryff CD, Kitayam S, Karasawa M, Markus H, Kawakami N, Coe C. Survey of Midlife in Japan (MIDJA). April-September 2008. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]; 2018. Costa PT, McCrae RR, Shimonaka Y, Nakazato K, Gondou Y, Takayama M. NEO-PI-R, NEO-FFI manual for the Japanease version. Tokyo Shinri, Tokyo, Japan; 2011. Higuchi K. A Two-Step Approach to Quantitative Content Analysis: KH Coder Tutorial using Anne of Green Gables (Part I). Ritsumeikan social Sci Rev. 2016;52(3):77–91. Higuchi K. A Two-Step Approach to Quantitative Content Analysis: KH Coder Tutorial using Anne of Green Gables (Part II). Ritsumeikan social Sci Rev. 2017;53(1):137–47. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;8:18. Greenacre MJ. Correspondence analysis in practice. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2007. xiii, 280 p. Fenigstein A, Levine MP. Self-attention, concept activation, and the causal self. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1984;20(3):231–45. Mor N, Winquist J. Self-focused attention and negative affect: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2002;128(4):638–62. Sohal M, Singh P, Dhillon BS, Gill HS. Efficacy of journaling in the management of mental illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fam Med Community Health. 2022;10(1). Guo L. The delayed, durable effect of expressive writing on depression, anxiety and stress: A meta-analytic review of studies with long-term follow-ups. Br J Clin Psychol. 2023;62(1):272–97. Sutton A. Measuring the Effects of Self-Awareness: Construction of the Self-Awareness Outcomes Questionnaire. Eur J Psychol. 2016;12(4):645–58. Harkin B, Webb TL, Chang BP, Prestwich A, Conner M, Kellar I, et al. Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull. 2016;142(2):198–229. Zhang Y, Li M, Chieh Y, Han S. On a path to becoming more self-regulated: Reflective journals' impact on Chinese English as a foreign language students' self-regulated writing strategy use. Front Psychol. 2022;13:1042031. Epp S. The value of reflective journaling in undergraduate nursing education: a literature review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2008;45(9):1379–88. Yamanaka T, Nawa NE, Yamagishi N. Gratitude and Academic Motivation among Japanese High School Students: A Nine-week Gratitude Journal Intervention Study. PsyArXiv. 2022. Corona K, Senft N, Campos B, Chen C, Shiota M, Chentsova-Dutton YE. Ethnic variation in gratitude and well-being. Emotion. 2020;20(3):518–24. Chopik WJ, Newton NJ, Ryan LH, Kashdan TB, Jarden AJ. Gratitude across the life span: Age differences and links to subjective well-being. J Posit Psychol. 2019;14(3):292–302. Latkin CA, Edwards C, Davey-Rothwell MA, Tobin KE. The relationship between social desirability bias and self-reports of health, substance use, and social network factors among urban substance users in Baltimore, Maryland. Addict Behav. 2017;73:133–6. Tourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(5):859–83. Shibaoka M, Masuda M, Iwasawa S, Ikezawa S, Eguchi H, Nakagome K. Relationship between objective cognitive functioning and work performance among Japanese workers. J Occup Health. 2023;65(1):e12385. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 06 Oct, 2025 Read the published version in BMC Psychology → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 07 May, 2025 Reviews received at journal 01 May, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 14 Apr, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 08 Apr, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 07 Apr, 2025 First submitted to journal 05 Apr, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5502091","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":439927823,"identity":"396bb5e1-7a2e-48c8-ad26-2a30a4334650","order_by":0,"name":"Noriko Yamagishi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ritsumeikan University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Noriko","middleName":"","lastName":"Yamagishi","suffix":""},{"id":439927824,"identity":"3ca4c7c7-7173-4fef-ae9c-e69c6375a5f5","order_by":1,"name":"Norberto Eiji Nawa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Norberto","middleName":"Eiji","lastName":"Nawa","suffix":""},{"id":439927825,"identity":"8b816b4f-1e44-4b6d-860a-5c24b1326d93","order_by":2,"name":"Shota Isomura","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"NTT data institute of management consulting, inc","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shota","middleName":"","lastName":"Isomura","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-11-22 06:23:40","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03494-2","type":"published","date":"2025-10-06T15:57:20+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":80276153,"identity":"1421de82-19fb-429e-b68d-abe42d27a36f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:03:13","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":62308,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eA Conceptual Model of Gratitude and Work Engagement: Integration into the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model. This model illustrates how a gratitude intervention fosters awareness and engagement with available Job Resources, which in turn contributes to greater Work Engagement.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/c0c9b8b40d3285d559045d37.png"},{"id":80277254,"identity":"d4d90b67-6124-4593-9253-e0721fb86e00","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:11:13","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":59393,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eParticipant Flow from Enrollment to Analysis. Numbers in parentheses after ‘n=’ indicate the number of participants at each step.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/bfe1867a1a49279cedff8b3d.png"},{"id":80277257,"identity":"ee9c7af9-5534-4284-bbe4-619923afd987","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:11:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":103195,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in UWES (Total) Scores Across Three Time Points. UWES (Total) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure3.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/7fa82a957487e3a602f276ae.jpg"},{"id":80276156,"identity":"d6a576ed-1679-46ad-907b-99746313e54e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:03:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":106072,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in UWES (Absorption) Scores Across Three Time Points. UWES (Absorption) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure4.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/e0b0903ac3523fa3e62e0d06.jpg"},{"id":80276154,"identity":"76f97f44-2dff-49f1-ad62-0d9ae134ad16","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:03:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":110218,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in WM-J (competitive-oriented motivation) Scores Across Three Time Points. WM-J (competitive-oriented motivation) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure5.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/4a07e204010a637b3f3d4afa.jpg"},{"id":80279474,"identity":"c641ead4-418e-45db-b2e5-1f8d501a5a4a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:35:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":92714,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in GQ-J Scores Across Three Time Points. GQ-J average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure6.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/0fb3e1892cc027edd8e97ead.jpg"},{"id":80277255,"identity":"3d4eee20-96e8-411d-8f14-2293b213009f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:11:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":99419,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in SWLS Scores Across Three Time Points. SWLS average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure7.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/2d2d552262bd41638cf634e0.jpg"},{"id":80276159,"identity":"6458ad84-de1d-4ecc-aecc-8bd1265cfbb8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:03:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":102339,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in PWBS (Purpose in life) Scores Across Three Time Points. PWBS (Purpose in life) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure8.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/2fb04ed892f2007274192184.jpg"},{"id":80276161,"identity":"062b0f84-bedd-436e-8874-73288fe5a215","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-10 05:03:13","extension":"jpg","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":107130,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eChanges in PWBS (Autonomy) Scores Across Three Time Points. PWBS (Autonomy) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure9.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/ab1532992fdc2c0cfa827143.jpg"},{"id":93419696,"identity":"59aed531-6b16-4c91-8183-bb64c438b42a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-10-13 16:06:05","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2096853,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5502091/v1/739328b8-d478-43bc-a739-e8bfd1caeb00.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eAs a key component of positive psychology (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), the benefits of gratitude have been extensively studied across various domains, including subjective well-being (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), social interactions (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), and health outcomes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). Gratitude has been shown to promote positive emotions, strengthen social bonds, and even improve physical health by reducing harmful behaviors and stress.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecently, there has been growing interest in understanding how gratitude influences motivation, as it is a critical driver of success across different contexts. Research suggests that gratitude plays a significant role in enhancing motivation. For example, Nawa and Yamagishi (2021) found that gratitude interventions improved academic motivation among university students, indicating that focusing on gratitude may be crucial for enhancing success in academic settings (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, studies with children and adolescents have shown that gratitude interventions lead to improvements in positive affect (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e), which is closely linked to increased intrinsic motivation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor working adults, motivation often translates into work engagement, a crucial concept that represents a positive and fulfilling state of mind toward work (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). Engaged employees experience an energetic and effective connection with their work activities, leading to sustained effort and enthusiasm (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). While work motivation alone may not directly enhance work performance, its impact is often mediated by work engagement, highlighting the critical role of engagement in achieving better outcomes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). Previous studies have shown that high levels of work engagement are associated with improved psychological well-being, better health, and organizational benefits, including increased productivity and lower turnover rates (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e). Given the importance of work engagement for both employees and organizations, understanding the role of gratitude in fostering engagement at work has emerged as a key area of research.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne theoretical framework that helps explain how gratitude may foster work engagement is the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e). It identifies two key factors that positively impact work engagement: job resources (e.g., autonomy, social support, colleagues\u0026rsquo; support, supervisory coaching) and personal resources (e.g., optimism, self-esteem). Interventions targeting job resources typically focus on improving physical, social, or organizational aspects of the job, such as development opportunities, social capital, and coworker support. Meanwhile, interventions targeting personal resources aim to enhance self-efficacy, resilience, or optimism (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study proposes a new way to enhance job resources - through gratitude (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). When individuals engage in gratitude-focused practices, such as keeping a gratitude journal, they actively reflect on positive experiences in their daily lives (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). These reflections may include recognizing help from colleagues, support from family members, or opportunities to engage in meaningful tasks. Through this process, individuals may develop a heightened awareness and appreciation of their existing job resources, such as social support, supervisory guidance, and task variety.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom a psychological perspective, this process aligns with Self-Determination Theory (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e), which identifies three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For example, decision-making opportunities promote autonomy, giving employees a greater sense of control over their work; feedback from supervisors fosters learning, which enhances job competence; and support from colleagues and supervisors strengthens relatedness, fostering a sense of connection and belonging. By enhancing the intrinsic motivational role of job resources, gratitude interventions may strengthen employees\u0026rsquo; perceptions of their available resources, thereby boosting work engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmpirical evidence supports this proposed link between gratitude and engagement. Previous studies have found positive correlations between gratitude and work engagement. Nicuta (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e) reported that teachers with higher gratitude disposition experienced greater work engagement and lower burnout. Similarly, Komase (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e) found that feeling appreciated at work and workplace-wide gratitude (measured as the average gratitude level of employees) were associated with higher engagement, particularly in supportive environments. These findings suggest that gratitude - whether expressed individually or embedded in organizational culture - may contribute to greater engagement at work.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, despite these correlations, a causal relationship between gratitude and work engagement has not yet been established. Most research relies on cross-sectional designs, making it difficult to determine whether gratitude directly enhances engagement or whether engaged employees simply experience more gratitude. Komase (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e) conducted a pre-post gratitude intervention where employees attended a one-time workshop and were instructed to express gratitude via email three times a week. However, the study found no significant changes in work engagement. Because the intervention lacked a control group, it remains unclear whether the absence of an effect was due to the intervention\u0026rsquo;s ineffectiveness or external unmeasured factors. Additionally, since participation was voluntary and unpaid, selection bias may have influenced the findings, as highly motivated employees may have been more likely to take part.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite these efforts, few studies have employed rigorous experimental designs to test the effects of gratitude interventions on work engagement. The present study seeks to address this gap by conducting a controlled gratitude intervention among working adults. Previous research with university students have shown that focusing on grateful events in general, i.e., not limited to experiences directly associated with their academic activities, improved students\u0026rsquo; overall academic motivation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Building on such findings, we invited participants to keep a gratitude journal where they could record anything they felt grateful for, not limited to work-related experiences. This inclusive approach allowed for a more comprehensive understanding of gratitude\u0026rsquo;s potential effects. Participants in the control group, in contrast, were asked to keep a journal of their daily life activities. By comparing outcomes between these groups, this study aims to examine whether gratitude interventions enhance work engagement by increasing the perception and utilization of job resources, in line with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eContributions of this study\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study contributes to both theory and practice by extending existing research on gratitude and work engagement. Theoretically, it integrates gratitude into the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model, proposing a new mechanism through which gratitude enhances work engagement by strengthening the perception of job resources. This novel perspective builds on Broaden-and-Build Theory (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e) by exploring gratitude\u0026rsquo;s role in workplace motivation. Practically, this study provides experimental evidence for gratitude journaling as a simple, cost-effective intervention to enhance work engagement, which could inform organizational well-being programs. Furthermore, by employing a controlled intervention design, this study addresses a critical gap in the literature, as prior findings have been predominantly correlational rather than causal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Objectives\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe present study is guided by the following research objectives:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eObjective 1\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo measure work engagement before and after a 12-day gratitude journal intervention, using a control group that keeps a daily life journal, in a sample of Japanese employees.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eObjective 2\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo compare the effects of journaling on work engagement across groups and time points.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eObjective 3\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine functional differences between gratitude and daily life journal entries in relation to increased perception of job resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eHypotheses\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the JD-R framework and previous research on gratitude, this study tests the following hypotheses:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eH1\u003c/b\u003e. Gratitude interventions will lead to increased work engagement compared to a control condition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eH2\u003c/b\u003e. The effect of gratitude on work engagement will be mediated by increased awareness and recognition of job resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile the primary focus of this study was to examine the impact of gratitude interventions on work engagement, additional psychological measures were included to explore the broader effects of gratitude and ensure pre-intervention comparability between groups. These measures were chosen based on theoretical and empirical considerations:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWork Motivation\u003c/b\u003e was included to test whether the gratitude intervention influenced work-related motivation, given that a previous study with college students have shown that gratitude interventions improve academic motivation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). This allowed us to explore whether similar effects extend to workplace settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eGratitude Disposition\u003c/b\u003e was assessed for two purposes: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) to ensure no pre-existing differences in gratitude disposition between the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups at the pre-intervention stage, and (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) to examine whether trait gratitude changed following the 12-day intervention, as it directly reflects the study\u0026rsquo;s target construct. Although gratitude is generally considered a stable trait, previous studies have demonstrated that gratitude interventions can lead to increases in gratitude scores (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, gratitude disposition has been shown to have a positive relationship with work engagement (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting that changes in work engagement may be accompanied by shifts in gratitude disposition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerspective Taking (PT)\u003c/b\u003e was included in this study as a secondary outcome, based on Fredrickson\u0026rsquo;s Broaden-and-Build Theory (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e), which suggests that positive emotions, including gratitude, expand cognitive and social perspectives. Since gratitude fosters openness and awareness of others, it is expected to enhance perspective-taking as gratitude increases. Supporting this, previous research has demonstrated a positive correlation between gratitude and PT (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e). However, the direction of this relationship remains unclear. Thus, we measured PT to examine whether a gratitude intervention causally enhances empathic perspective-taking alongside its effects on work engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLife Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being\u003c/b\u003e were measured as secondary outcomes to assess whether the gratitude intervention enhanced overall well-being beyond work engagement. Previous studies have reported mixed findings regarding the effects of gratitude interventions on well-being (for a review, see Komase, 2021 (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e)). While some studies have found significant improvements (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e), others have reported no measurable change (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). However, cross-sectional studies have constantly shown positive associations between gratitude and well-being, with particularly strong associations with certain dimensions of psychological well-being (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e). Based on these findings, we included well-being measures to examine whether gratitude journaling enhances well-being in addition to its potential impact on work engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePersonality Traits\u003c/b\u003e were measured before the intervention to compare the gratitude journal and the control groups. Given the high correlations between certain personality traits and work engagement (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e), this measurement ensured that any observed effects of the gratitude intervention on work engagement were not due to personality differences.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study was conducted as part of the study project of \u0026ldquo;Well-Living for Well-Being\u0026rdquo; organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN), Tokyo, Japan. Participants were recruited from a pool of approximately 50,000 individuals registered in the Human Information Database maintained by the NTT DATA Institute of Management Consulting, Inc., Tokyo, Japan. Interested individuals were directed to an online form outlining the study procedures, schedule, eligibility criteria (full-time employment, Japanese workers, working in Japan on weekdays, age between 30 and 49, ability to maintain a journal and respond to questionnaires via smartphone), and the monetary reward (32,000 yen) upon completion. Candidates meeting all requirements were asked to provide their contact information, name, and gender. In adherence to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, candidates opting to participate were required to complete and submit an online consent form. The study received approval from the Shiba Palace Clinic Ethics Review Committee in Tokyo, Japan.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e) for a two-way repeated measures ANOVA (within-between interaction), with power set at 0.80, a medium effect size of 0.25, an alpha error rate of 0.05, two groups, three measurements, a correlation among repeated measures of 0.50, and a nonsphericity correlation value of 0.75. The analysis indicated that a minimum total sample size of 34 participants was required. A total of 100 company employees who met the eligibility criteria, evenly divided between male and female, took part in the study, exceeding the minimum requested sample size. All participant communication, including online forms, assessments, and journaling, was conducted in Japanese.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe participants in the experiment came from a wide range of company types, including sales, consulting, IT, manufacturing, logistics, and finance. Their job titles were distributed as follows: general employee (57.14%), supervisor (28.57%), department manager (5.71%), and general manager (8.57%). Out of the 100 participants recruited for the journal intervention experiment, 91 individuals wrote journal entries during the study period (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). Regarding responses to psychological measurements, 74 participants completed the assessment at T1 (just before the intervention) (36 in the gratitude journal group, 38 in the daily life journal group), and 70 individuals completed both T1 and T2 (immediately after the intervention) (35 in each group). All experimental participants were subsequently emailed a delayed follow-up questionnaire at T3 (approximately 1.5 months after the intervention). Of the participants who completed the questionnaires at both T1 and T2, 68 individuals also completed the assessment at T3 (35 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eProcedure\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was part of a two-month project organized by the CAN, aimed at exploring innovative ways to apply foundational positive psychology research to societal contexts. During this project (October 14th to December 19th, 2022), participants took part in several different studies. The gratitude journal intervention took place over the course of 12 days (October 24th to November 4th, 2022), during which no other experiments were conducted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA few days before the experiment, participants received an email with instructions for accessing a custom-developed web application, including an individual account name and password. They were asked to log in via the provided URL and complete psychological questionnaires (see \"Materials\" section). Participants were then randomly assigned to either the gratitude journal group (experimental) or the daily life journal group (control) while ensuring a balanced distribution of gender across groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor 12 days, participants received daily email reminders with a URL to the web application, prompting them to write journal entries via their smartphones. Participants in the gratitude journal group wre instructed to \"\u003cem\u003ePlease write down at least one thing (ideally around three) you felt grateful for today. If nothing comes to mind, you may recall something you felt grateful for recently (within the past year).\u003c/em\u003e\" Participants in the daily life journal group were instructed to \"\u003cem\u003ePlease write down at least one thing (ideally around three) that happened today.\u003c/em\u003e\" Example entries included expressing gratitude for a colleague\u0026rsquo;s help (gratitude journal) and describing a visit to a bakery (daily life journal). Each session allowed up to five free-writing spaces, with no limit on daily access. Participants could submit additional entries if desired. Immediately after the 12-day intervention and 1.5 months later, they completed the same psychological scales as those administered at the pre-intervention stage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eMaterials\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWork Engagement\u003c/b\u003e: Work engagement was assessed using the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e), which measures workers' positive mental states towards their work and is considered the positive counterpart to burnout. The UWES consists of three dimensions: Vigor, Dedication, and Absorption. While these dimensions can be analyzed separately, the UWES manual recommends using the total score when focusing on overall work engagement, due to the high intercorrelations observed among the three dimensions (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e). Our correlation analyses confirmed this pattern (Vigor-Dedication r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.856, Vigor-Absorption r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.782, and Dedication-Absorption r\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.866, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), consistent with the values reported in the UWES manual (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e). Based on this, we primarily used the total UWES scores to examine the effect of gratitude journaling on overall work engagement, as our focus was on engagement as a unified construct rather than its components. We used the Japanese version of the UWES (UWES-J) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e), which includes nine items (three per dimension). Participants rated each item (e.g., \u0026ldquo;At my work, I feel bursting with energy\u0026rdquo;) on a 7-point scale from 0 (Never) to 6 (Always/Every day). Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated good internal consistency (Total alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.945, Vigor alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89, Dedication alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.87, and Absorption alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.85).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eWork Motivation\u003c/b\u003e: Work motivation was assessed using the 36-item Work Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations (referred to as WM-J)(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e), which was developed specifically for Japanese respondents based on the work motivation scale by Barrick et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e). The WM-J measures four aspects of work motivation: Competitive, Cooperative, Learning, and Accomplishment-Oriented motivation, with each dimension assessed by nine items. Participants rated each item on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated high internal consistency: Competitive alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.92, Cooperative alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.90, Learning alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.93, and Accomplishment-Oriented alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.91.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eGratitude Disposition\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude disposition was assessed using the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e), which measures individuals' tendency to experience gratitude. Participants rated statements such as \u0026ldquo;I have so much in life to be thankful for\u0026rdquo; on a 7-point scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The GQ-6 has been translated into Japanese, and its validity has been confirmed for Japanese individuals (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR41\" citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e). However, Shiraki(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e) conducted a factor analysis on the Japanese version and found that the sixth item (\u0026ldquo;Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone\u0026rdquo;) had a factor loading lower than 0.4, while the remaining five items showed loadings greater than 0.4, supporting a one-factor structure for the Japanese version. Another study also confirmed this five-item version (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, we excluded the sixth item when assessing participants\u0026rsquo; gratitude disposition in this study as well. This scale will be referred to as GQ-J. The Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.87, indicating good internal consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003ePerspective Taking\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Perspective Taking (PT) Scale is part of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e) and assesses individuals\u0026rsquo; tendency to adopt others\u0026rsquo; perspectives. The original scale consists of seven items, such as \u0026ldquo;Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in their place,\u0026rdquo; rated on a 0 to 4 scale (0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;does not describe me well to 4\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;describes me very well). In this study, we used the Japanese version (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e), which employs a five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.72.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eLife Satisfaction\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe 5-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e) was used to assess participants' overall life satisfaction. The SWLS is widely used as a measure of the cognitive component of subjective well-being (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e). Respondents rated statements such as \u0026ldquo;In most ways my life is close to my ideal\u0026rdquo; on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). We employed the Japanese translation of the SWLS available on the website of the original study's first author. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.89, indicating good internal consistency.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePsychological Well-Being\u003c/b\u003e: Psychological well-being was assessed using the 42-item version of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e), which measures six dimensions: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, purpose in life, and self-acceptance (7 items each). We used the Japanese translation of the scale (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e). Items were intermixed and rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's alphas in this study were: autonomy\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.75, environmental mastery\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.74, personal growth\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.80, positive relations with others\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.72, purpose in life\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.62, and self-acceptance\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.80, consistent with findings from the Japanese development study(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePersonality Traits\u003c/b\u003e: Personality traits were assessed using the Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), a measure of the Big Five personality traits. The NEO-FFI consists of 60 items, with 12 items per dimensions: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. We used the Japanese translation of the NEO-FFI (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e). Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was: Neuroticism alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.88, Extraversion alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.84, Openness alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.66, Agreeableness alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.70, and Conscientiousness alpha\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.77.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eExperimental Schedule\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll psychological measures (UWES/WM-J/GQ-J/PT/SWLS/PWBS/) except NEO-FFI were assessed at three time points to evaluate the effects and persistence of the 12-day journal intervention. Assessments were conducted just before the intervention (T1: October 20th to 23rd ), immediately after the intervention (T2: November 4th to 7th ), and approximately 1.5 months after the intervention (T3: December 21st to 25th ). The NEO-FFI was administered at T1. Participants were informed about the schedule for the three psychological measurements during recruitment. However, they were unaware of the different groups in the journaling experiment and were not informed of the research hypothesis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eAnalysis methods\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29) unless stated otherwise. Group differences were examined by analyzing the dependent variable using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (rm-ANOVA). Adjustments for degrees of freedom were made using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (Mauchly's sphericity test) as needed. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of less than 0.05. Post-hoc tests were conducted when appropriate and adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni correction if applicable. All textual analyses of journal entry were conducted using KH Coder, a computer software package for quantitative content analyses (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine the effects of the gratitude journal intervention, we conducted a two-way repeated measures ANOVA with time (T1, T2, and T3) as the within-subject factor and journal group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) as the between-subject factor for each one of the outcome measures.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eParticipants\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor the statistical analysis of the journal intervention, we included only participants who wrote at least one journal entry during the intervention period and completed the questionnaires at all three timepoints (34 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group). The flow of participants through the study is illustrated in the CONSORT flow diagram (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e)(Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Details regarding the composition of each group are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of participants by gender and mean age for each one of the groups\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"9\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily life journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (SD)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[range]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSub-total\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSub-total\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnrollment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.97(5.17)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e[31\u0026ndash;49]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eT1, T2, T3 \u0026amp; Journal entry\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.21(5.15) [31\u0026ndash;48]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: SD indicates standard deviation. T1 refers to pre-intervention, T2 to post-intervention, and T3 to a follow-up at approximately 1.5 months. To be included in the analysis, participants had to complete the questionnaires at T1, T2 and T3, and additionally provide journal entries during the 12-day intervention period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePersonality Traits: NEO-FFI\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe conducted a two-way rm-ANOVA using the mean scores of the five NEO-FFI dimensions from two journal groups to examine potential differences in personality traits at the pre-intervention stage (T1). Group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) served as a between-subjects factor, and personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) were within-subject factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults revealed a significant main effect of NEO-FFI traits (F(2.461, 177.219)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9.393, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.115), with no significant main effect of group (F(1, 72)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.280, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.135, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.031) or interaction between NEO-FFI traits and group (F(2.461, 177.219)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.560, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.068, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.034). These findings suggest no substantive differences in NEO-FFI personality traits between gratitude journal and daily life journal group participants, thus minimizing the potential influence on the gratitude journal intervention outcomes. Mean scores and standard deviations for each trait are detailed by group in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean scores and standard deviations of NEO-FFI traits by group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eO\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;36)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.19 (8.31)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.00 (7.07)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.67 (5.36)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.08 (5.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.86 (6.25)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily life journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;38)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.26 (9.67)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.97 (8.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.03 (5.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.18 (5.45)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.97 (6.03)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. The abbreviations denote each trait: N for Neuroticism, E for Extraversion, O for Openness, A for Agreeableness, and C for Conscientiousness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePsychological Scales\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e summarized the statistical results for all psychological scales examined in this study, including work engagement (UWES), work motivation (WM-J), gratitude (GQ-J), perspective taking (PT), life satisfaction (SWLS), and psychological well-being (PWBS).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary of Statistical Results for Psychological Scales\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"13\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor Time\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c11\" namest=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInteraction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c13\" namest=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Scale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ep value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eη\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimple main effects\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc tests (Bonferroni correction)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUWES\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.357\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.261\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.020\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.223\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.273\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.018\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.548\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.005\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.079\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.82, \u003cb\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.010\u003c/b\u003e, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;= 0.069\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the gratitude journal: Time] T1 (2.807)\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T2 (3.141)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVigor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.757, 114.220)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.383\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.656\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.273\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.263\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.019\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.757, 114.220)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.073\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.051\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDedication\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.400\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.077\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.303\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.352\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.015\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.063\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbsorption\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.456\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.034\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.050\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.058\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.308\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.176\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.045\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.047\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.77, \u003cb\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.026\u003c/b\u003e, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;= 0.055\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the gratitude journal: Time] T1(2.520\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T2(2.922)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWM-J\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCompetitive\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.264\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.136\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.037\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.848\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For Time] T1(2.823)\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T2(3.022), T1\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T3(3.154)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCooperative\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.117\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.125\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.032\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.872\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.354\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.603\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.205\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLearning\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.697, 110.328)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.146\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.321\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.017\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.672\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.201\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.025\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.697, 110.328)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.771\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.446\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccomplishment-oriented\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.287\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.106\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.366\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.247\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.872\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGQ-J\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.826, 118.711)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.825\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.422\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.518\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For Time] T1(24.79)\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T2(25.88), T1\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T3 (26.45)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePT\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.114\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.033\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.610\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.209\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.361\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.697\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSWLS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.908\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.004\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.083\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.210\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.649\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.960\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For Time] T1(17.51)\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T3(19.07)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"5\" rowspan=\"6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePWBS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAutonomy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.320\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.271\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.020\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.283\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.596\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.731\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.027\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.054\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the daily life journal: Time] (F(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.32, \u003cb\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.015\u003c/b\u003e, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;= 0.06228\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the daily life journal: Time] T2(31.21)\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;T3 (29.39)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnvironmental mastery\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.793, 116.570)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.360\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.699\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.823\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.368\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.793, 116.570)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.367\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.104\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.035\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersonal growth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.845\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.432\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.233\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.631\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.668\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.193\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.025\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive relations with others\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.670, 108.533)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.481\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.231\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.022\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.377\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.071\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.049\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.670, 108.533)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.321\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.687\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePurpose in life\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.826, 118.720)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.484\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.093\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.037\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.450\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.505\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.007\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(1.826, 118.720)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.053\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e0.004\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the daily life journal: Time] F(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.73, \u003cb\u003eP\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004\u003c/b\u003e, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026nbsp;= 0.081\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[For the daily life journal: Time] T1(31.88)\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;T2(30.64)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSelf-acceptance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.189\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.828\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.659\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF(2, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.565\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.213\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"13\"\u003eNote: η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; represents partial eta-squared, a measure of effect size. For simple main effects and post-hoc tests, only significant results are reported, with Bonferroni correction applied at α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05. The following abbreviations denote each psychological scale: UWES (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale), WM-J (Work Motivation Questionnaire for Japanese), GQ-J (Japanese version of the GQ-6, Gratitude Questionnaire), PT (Perspective Taking Scale), SWLS (Satisfaction With Life Scale), and PWBS (Psychological Well-Being Scale).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e**********\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInsert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e around here\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e***********\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBelow, we describe the key findings, followed by a brief overview of secondary findings. The two-way repeated measures ANOVA on UWES (Total scores) revealed a significant interaction between time and group (F(1, 130)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.548, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.005, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.079). Further, in the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant, and post-hoc analyses (Bonferroni corrected at α\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05) showed a significant increase in work engagement total scores from T1 to T2 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). No significant change was observed in the daily life journal group. A similar pattern was found for UWES Absorption (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, see details in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). These findings suggest that gratitude journaling effectively enhances work engagement, supporting Hypothesis 1. Given that the proposed mechanism involves increased awareness and recognition of job resources, we further examined participants\u0026rsquo; journal entries to test Hypothesis 2 (see \"Journal Entry Contents\" section).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA significant main effect of time was observed, indicating overall increases in competitive work motivation (WM-J, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e), gratitude (GQ-J, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e), and life satisfaction (SWLS, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e) across participants, regardless of journal type. These results suggest that the act of journaling, regardless of thematic content, may drive certain psychological changes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterestingly, only the daily life journal group showed a significant decrease in the Purpose in Life dimension of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) from T1 to T2 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that reflecting on daily events without a gratitude focus may lead to self-focused attention and negative affect. Additionally, a decrease in the Autonomy dimension of PWBS was observed from T2 to T3 in the daily life journal group (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). This may indicate a delayed effect of journaling, suggesting that writing about daily life experiences could lead to reduced perceptions of self-control or autonomy over time. Further research is needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAdditional analysis \u0026ndash; age and gender\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this experiment, participants were aged between 31 and 49 years and were evenly distributed between females and males. To further investigate the influence of age and gender on changes in total UWES scores and the absorption dimension, we conducted a three-way rm-ANOVA with group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) and gender (female vs. male) as between-subject factors, time (T1, T2 and T3) as within-subject factors, and participant age as a covariate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTotal UWES scores\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults showed that age did not have a significant effect on total UWES scores, F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.486, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.488, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.008, suggesting that differences in age did not systematically modulate intervention effects. Additionally, there was no significant three-way interaction among group, time and gender (F(2, 124)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.142, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.122, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.033). However, the interaction between group and time was significant (F(2, 124)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6.134, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.003, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.090). We further found that for the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant (F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.971, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.164), with the adjusted score at T2 (3.167) being significantly higher than at T1 (2.804). No significant differences were detected for the daily life journal group (F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.213, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.118, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.068). Together, these results indicate that age and gender did not influence changes in total UWES scores.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eAbsorption Dimension of UWES\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA similar pattern of results was observed with Absorption dimension of UWES. Results showed that age did not have a significant effect (F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.875, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.353, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.014), and there was no significant three-way interaction among group, time and gender (F(2, 124)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.639, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.198, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.026). However, the interaction between group and time was significant (F(2, 124)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3.443, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.035, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.053). We found that for the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant (F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;4.184, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.020, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.121), with the adjusted score at T2 (2.961) being significantly higher than at T1 (2.525). No significant differences were detected for the daily life journal group (F(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.892, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.063, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026sup2; = 0.087). Together, these results indicate that age and gender did not influence changes in UWES absorption scores.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eJournal entry contents\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine Hypothesis 2, which proposes that gratitude interventions enhance awareness and recognition of job resources, we analyzed participants' journal entries using KH Coder (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e). Unlike the psychological scale results, which are based on participants' self-assessments, this analysis examines the content of their journal reflections by identifying word usage patterns and associations using both word frequency and correspondence analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 91 participants wrote journal entries (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). For this analysis, we focused on the journal entry contents of 67 participants (34 in the gratitude group and 33 in the daily life journal group) who provided journal entries during the journal intervention period and completed the psychological measurements at T1, T2, and T3.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo provide a descriptive overview of participants' journaling activity, we first examined overall patterns of journal entries. On average, participants in the gratitude journal group wrote on 9.47 days (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.12, range 4\u0026ndash;12) out of 12 days of the intervention. Participants in the daily life journal group were equally compliant, writing on average on 9.64 days (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2.00, range 6\u0026ndash;12) during the 12-day intervention. Moreover, on average, gratitude journal participants wrote 1.54 entries per day (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.88, range 1\u0026ndash;8), with each entry containing 44.51 Japanese characters (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.54, range 4\u0026ndash;169). Daily life journal participants wrote 3.06 entries per day (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89, range 1\u0026ndash;7), with an average length of 28.18 characters (SD\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15.08, range 2\u0026ndash;141).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eWord Frequency Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, we conducted a word frequency analysis to identify the most commonly used words in each journal type (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal). Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents the ten most frequently used words in each group\u0026rsquo;s journal entries. Participants in the gratitude journal group typically used words such as \"thank you\" (114 occurrences), \"gratitude\" (87), \"colleagues\" (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e), and \"happy\" (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e), as well as words related to personal relationship, such as \"children\" (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e), suggesting an increased tendency to recognize both workplace and personal social connections, along with positive experiences. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group primarily described routine events, with words such as \"today\" (239), \"work\" (135), \"go\" (86), \"eat\" (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e), and \"cold\" (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e). These results indicate that gratitude journaling encouraged participants to reflect more on interpersonal and positive resources, while daily life journaling focused more on neutral descriptions of daily activities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTop 10 most frequent words in gratitude and daily life journal entries\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily life journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWord\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of occurrences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWord\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of occurrences\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThank you\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e114\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eToday\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e239\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWork\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e135\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWork\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThink\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eColleagues\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCold\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChildren\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTomorrow\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMyself\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBuy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHappy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMorning\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerson\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDelicious\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMake\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThink\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: The total number of words was 4449 for the gratitude journal entries, and 5685 for the daily life journal entries.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCorrespondence Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo further investigate the relationship between journal type and word usage, we conducted a correspondence analysis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e) based on the words that appeared 20 or more times in either journal. This analysis uses the chi-square distance to quantify the association between words and journal type, with larger absolute values indicating stronger associations. Importantly, it can provide insights on how similarly the words were used by each group. In essence, words are mapped along a single axis, with words that were more commonly used by participants in the gratitude journal group loaded with negative values, words that were more commonly used by the participants in the daily life journal loaded with positive values, and words that appeared in both groups located around the origin of the axis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e presents the ten most characteristic words for each journal type. The words \"thank you\" (-1.819), \"gratitude\" (-1.763), \"kind\" (-1.705), \"colleague\" (-1.580), and \"daughter\" (-1.281) were strongly associated with the gratitude journal group, reinforcing the idea that gratitude journaling enhances recognition of both workplace support and personal relationships, including family connections. In contrast, words such as \"cold\" (1.386), \"today\" (1.169), \"bad\" (1.156), \"tomorrow\" (1.076), and \"sleep\" (1.076), were uniquely associated with the daily life journal, reflecting a greater focus on daily experiences and physical states rather than interpersonal relationships. These results provide strong evidence that gratitude journaling facilitates a cognitive shift toward recognizing and appreciating available job resources, supporting Hypothesis 2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTop 10 words most strongly associated with the gratitude and daily life journal groups based on correspondence analysis results\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily life journal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWord\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi-square distance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWord\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChi-square distance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThank you\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.819\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCold\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.386\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.763\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.351\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKind\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.705\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eToday\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.169\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eColleague\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.580\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBad\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.156\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBe saved\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.563\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTomorrow\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.076\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHelp\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.548\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSleep\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.076\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCorrespondence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.383\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUse\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaughter\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.281\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWalk\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.070\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTell\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.259\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNight\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.042\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMyself\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.218\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLunch\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.948\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNote: Positive chi-square distances reflect stronger association with the daily life journal group, while negative distances reflect stronger association with the gratitude journal group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSummary of Key Findings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study investigated the effects of a 12-day gratitude journaling intervention on the work engagement of Japanese employees. As predicted, participants in the gratitude journal group experienced significant increases in work engagement scores (total and absorption dimension) after the intervention, supporting Hypothesis 1. These effects remained significant even after controlling for age and gender, suggesting that the observed benefits were not due to demographic factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, Hypothesis 2 was supported through an analysis of participants\u0026rsquo; journal entries. Word frequency and correspondence analyses revealed that gratitude journaling facilitated a cognitive shift toward recognizing and appreciating job resources, particularly in the form of interpersonal relationships (e.g., colleagues' support, acts of kindness). This provides evidence that gratitude interventions may enhance work engagement by increasing awareness of available job resources, in line with the Job Demands-Resources Model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTheoretical Contributions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe current findings support the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model by demonstrating that gratitude can serve as a psychological trigger for recognizing and utilizing existing job resources. While the JD-R model highlights job resources such as colleague support, autonomy, and supervisory guidance as key drivers of work engagement, our findings suggest that gratitude interventions can enhance employees' awareness of these resources. By regularly reflecting on gratitude, individuals may become more attuned to the support, opportunities, and resources already available in their work environment, thereby increasing their engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, our findings extend the JD-R Model by showing that gratitude journaling does not only heighten awareness of work-related job resources but also broadens perceptions of social support beyond the workplace. In the gratitude journal group, participants frequently wrote about support from family members, highlighting a more generalized awareness of social resources. This aligns with Fredrickson\u0026rsquo;s Broaden-and-Build Theory, which suggests that positive emotions - such as gratitude - broaden individuals' cognitive perspectives, leading them to recognize more resources in their environment. In this case, gratitude journaling appears to help employees recognize not only their workplace support system but also their personal social network. Prior research with university students similarly found that gratitude interventions improved academic motivation, even when students primarily wrote about gratitude toward friends and family rather than school-related experiences. The current findings extend this evidence to a workplace setting, suggesting that a broader awareness of social support - both professional and personal - may contribute to increased work engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeyond theoretical alignment, this study also provides causal evidence supporting the role of gratitude in enhancing work engagement. While previous studies have found positive correlations between gratitude and engagement, most relied on cross-sectional data, making it difficult to determine whether gratitude actively increases engagement or simply coexists with it. By implementing a controlled intervention, we confirm that gratitude is not just an outcome of engagement but a mechanism that actively enhances it by reinforcing awareness of social support.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSecondary Findings\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBeyond enhancements in work engagement in the gratitude journal group, negative effects were observed in the daily life journal group regarding psychological well-being, particularly in the dimensions of purpose in life and autonomy. Participants in the daily life journal group experienced a decline in purpose in life scores immediately after the intervention (T2\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T1). One possible explanation is that writing about daily events, without a specific focus on gratitude, may have led participants to adopt a more self-focused perspective. Previous research suggests that increased self-focused attention is associated with negative affect, particularly when it emphasizes personal concerns and shortcomings (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e). In fact, self-focus has been linked to depressive symptoms, especially when it involves rumination on daily difficulties rather than positive reflections (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, correspondence analysis of journal entries revealed that negative words, such as cold and bad, were more frequently used in the daily life journal group. This suggests that participants may have experienced a shift toward self-focus and negative emotional processing, potentially contributing to the observed decline in purpose in life scores. Although journaling is often considered beneficial for mental health (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e), these findings indicate that its effects depend on the content and focus of the writing. This highlights the importance of structured journaling interventions, where emphasizing positive aspects, such as gratitude, may help mitigate unintended negative effects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to the changes observed in purpose in life, participants in the daily life journal group also experienced declines in autonomy scores at the follow-up measurement (T3\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;T2). This suggests that the effects of journaling on perceived autonomy may extend beyond the immediate intervention period and can involve delayed cognitive or emotional processes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e). One possible explanation is that while daily life journaling initially provided a structured means of self-reflection, its cessation may have led to a diminished sense of self-directed control over time. Another possibility, as discussed above, is that the non-specific nature of daily life journaling may have encouraged excessive self-focus during the intervention. If participants became accustomed to actively reflecting on their daily experiences, the removal of this structured reflection could have created a psychological shift, making them feel less in control of their thoughts or self-regulation. The decrease in autonomy might reflect a reduced sense of agency, as participants no longer had an intentional framework for processing their experiences. Future research should systematically vary the focus of journaling to examine its potential effects on autonomy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterestingly, both gratitude and daily life journaling also shared some psychological benefits. Specifically, participants in both groups experienced increases in the competitive-oriented dimension of work motivation (WM-J), gratitude disposition (GQ-J), and life satisfaction (SWLS). These results suggest that while the specific focus of journaling shapes distinct psychological outcomes, the act of journaling itself may serve as a broadly beneficial reflective practice.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eJournaling encourages self-awareness by prompting individuals to consciously reflect on their internal states and social interactions (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e). This reflective process aligns with gratitude theories, which emphasize recognizing benefits received from others (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), potentially explaining the observed increase in both GQ-J and SWLS scores across both groups. Additionally, the structured nature of journaling may facilitate reflective thinking and goal-setting, helping individuals identify gaps between their current and desired states. This process fosters behavioral changes, including greater effort and improved self-regulation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e), which are essential for competitive-oriented motivation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese findings highlight journaling\u0026rsquo;s dual role: as a general tool for self-reflection and as a targeted intervention shaped by its focus. Gratitude journaling, emphasizing positive recognition, may be particularly effective for enhancing work engagement, while daily life journaling offers broader but less specific and mixed benefits. Future research should explore ways to optimize different journaling approaches for diverse populations and workplace settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePractical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study highlight the importance of cultivating gratitude as a deliberate practice in workplace settings. The absence of words such as thank you or gratitude in the daily life journal group suggests that expressing gratitude does not occur naturally for many individuals - it must be intentionally fostered. Given that gratitude journaling significantly improved work engagement, organizations seeking to enhance employee motivation and well-being may benefit from implementing structured gratitude interventions as part of their workplace culture.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne key insight from this study is that gratitude does not need to be restricted to work-related experiences to positively impact work engagement. Participants in the gratitude journal group frequently reflected on not only workplace relationships but also personal support systems, such as family members. This suggests that recognizing gratitude across different aspects of life may enhance overall psychological resources, which in turn strengthens engagement at work. Companies that integrate gratitude-focused well-being programs should encourage employees to reflect on gratitude holistically, rather than limiting it to professional interactions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUltimately, this study demonstrates that gratitude is a powerful, low-cost intervention with the potential to boost employee engagement, strengthen workplace relationships, and contribute to a positive organizational culture. Future research should explore how different gratitude-based interventions can be adapted to various work environments, as well as how long-lasting these effects may be over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eLimitations and Future Directions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile this study provides valuable insights into how gratitude interventions enhance work engagement, several limitations should be considered.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst, the control group wrote about daily life events without being explicitly directed to focus on mental or emotional content, whereas the gratitude journal group reflected on gratitude-related experiences. Although both groups followed similar procedures, this key difference in focus may have influenced the degree of introspection and recognition of job resources. Future research should explore whether the benefits observed in work engagement are unique to gratitude journaling or whether other forms of reflective writing (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e), such as positive journaling (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e), could yield similar effects. This would help determine whether deliberate attention to gratitude is essential for increasing engagement or if a broader reflective practice could also enhance job resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, differences in writing patterns between groups may have influenced outcomes. Participants in the gratitude journal group tended to write fewer entries per day (1.54 on average), but with longer average length (44.51 Japanese characters per entry), suggesting a deeper level of reflection. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group wrote more frequent entries (3.06 per day), but each entry was shorter on average (28.18 characters), potentially reflecting a more surface-level approach to the journaling task. While we did not formally assess depth of content, these patterns raise the possibility that the amount and quality of reflection differed between groups, which could have influenced psychological outcomes. Future studies should consider standardizing journaling instructions (e.g., specifying the number of entries and suggested character length) to ensure comparable writing effort across groups, which could help isolate the specific effects of the gratitude intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThird, all participants were Japanese employees, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Cultural differences, particularly in how gratitude and daily reflections are perceived, could influence the results. Previous research has shown that the frequency and intensity of experiencing gratitude can vary across cultures, and these differences are associated with factors such as self-esteem, loneliness, and perceived stress (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that the effects of keeping a gratitude journal might lead to different emotional outcomes across cultural groups. Future studies should replicate this research in diverse cultural settings to better understand how these findings translate across different populations\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFourth, the relatively narrow age range of participants (30\u0026ndash;49 years, mean age 41) may influence how gratitude journaling affects work engagement. This limited age range could affect the robustness of the findings, as the effects of gratitude journaling might differ across age groups. Previous research has suggested that the disposition to feel gratitude changes with age, with younger and middle-aged individuals typically showing lower levels of gratitude, and older adults exhibiting higher levels (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, the impact of keeping a gratitude journal may vary across different age groups. In this study, the participants were not divided into age groups for analysis, which may have overlooked potential age-related differences. Future research should aim to include a broader age range, including participants in their 20s and 50s, and analyze the data separately by age group to determine whether the effects of gratitude-focused practices differ across generations in the workplace.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, it remains an open question how the results might differ if the effects of gratitude on work engagement were assessed using methods other than self-report scales. Self-report measures are prone to biases, such as social desirability or the tendency to respond in ways that maintain a positive self-concept (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e). To more comprehensively assess the impact of gratitude journaling on work engagement, future research should consider incorporating additional measures. One potential approach could be to track work performance indicators that may reflect levels of work engagement. For example, a recent study found that work performance was significantly associated with cognitive functions such as attention, executive functioning, and working memory among general workers (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests that cognitive performance tests could be used as more objective measures, alongside traditional metrics such as productivity rates, task completion accuracy, sales performance, presenteeism, absenteeism rates, and performance evaluations conducted by supervisors. Combining such data with self-report measures would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how gratitude interventions influence employees\u0026rsquo; work engagement and overall job performance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study provides experimental evidence that a simple gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement by increasing awareness and recognition of job resources, supporting the Job Demands-Resources Model and Broaden-and-Build Theory. The findings suggest that gratitude does not naturally arise in everyday reflections but must be actively cultivated, offering practical implications for workplace interventions. Given its low-cost, scalable nature, gratitude journaling may serve as an accessible tool for fostering engagement, well-being, and positive work culture. Future research should explore long-term effects, cross-cultural applications, and objective performance outcomes to further establish its effectiveness in diverse work settings.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionList\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eGQ-J\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJapanese version of the Gratitude Questionnaire\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eNEO-FFI\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeuroticism-Extraversion-Openness Inventory Five-Factor Inventory\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003ePT\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerspective Taking Scale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003ePWBS\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePsychological Well-Being Scale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003erm-ANOVA\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003erepeated measures analysis of variance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eSD\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eSWLS\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSatisfaction With Life Scale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eUWES\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUtrecht Work Engagement Scale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eWM-J\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWork Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the ethics committee of the Shiba Palace Clinic, Tokyo, Japan that is working under the authorization of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAll participants submitted an online consent form before taking part in the experiments, in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was partially funded with a grant from the Ritsumeikan Inamori Philosophy Research Center to NY and NEN. It was conducted as part of the \u0026quot;Well-Living for Well-Being\u0026quot; study project organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN) foundation. JMA Management Center Inc., Tokyo, Japan, provided partial support for this project through CAN activity. The funder and the supporter had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors\u0026rsquo; contribution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNY and NEN conceived the study, and NY, NEN and SI designed the experiment. SI acquired the data. NY performed the statistical analyses and wrote the manuscript with inputs from NEN and SI. All authors have approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe are grateful to A. Hirano and R. Ito for their assistance with statistical analyses and technical support, and to I. Hagiwara and H. Hosono for their helpful advice and encouragement throughout this project.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSeligman ME, Steen TA, Park N, Peterson C. Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. Am Psychol. 2005;60(5):410\u0026ndash;21.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEmmons RA, McCullough ME. Counting blessings versus burdens: an experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(2):377\u0026ndash;89.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlgoe SB, Dwyer PC, Younge A, Oveis C. A new perspective on the social functions of emotions: Gratitude and the witnessing effect. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2020;119(1):40\u0026ndash;74.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlgoe SB, Chandler KR. Experienced gratitude is a catalyst for upward spirals of perceived partner responsiveness. Curr Opin Psychol. 2024;55:101764.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang K, Rees VW, Dorison CA, Kawachi I, Lerner JS. The role of positive emotion in harmful health behavior: Implications for theory and public health campaigns. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024;121(28):e2320750121.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNawa NE, Yamagishi N. Enhanced academic motivation in university students following a 2-week online gratitude journal intervention. BMC Psychol. 2021;9(1):71.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFroh JJ, Kashdan TB, Ozimkowski KM, Miller N. Who benefits the most from a gratitude intervention in children and adolescents? Examining positive affect as a moderator. J Posit Psychol. 2009;4(5):408\u0026ndash;22.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePekrun R, Goetz T, Titz W, Perry RP. Positive emotions in education. In: Frydenberg E, editor. Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions, and challenges. Oxford University Press; 2002. pp. 149\u0026ndash;73.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB, Bakker AB. Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. J Organizational Behav. 2004;25:293\u0026ndash;315.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShimazu A, Schaufeli WB. Work engagement: an emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Biosci Trends. 2008;2(1):2.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFirgan Lussa M, Sudiro A, Dwi Vata Hapsari R. The effect of work motivation and work environment on employee performance through work engagement. J Res Bus Social Sci. 2023;12(9):134\u0026ndash;43.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSimpson MR. Engagement at work: a review of the literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(7):1012\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOfei-Dodoo S, Long MC, Bretches M, Kruse BJ, Haynes C, Bachman C. Work engagement, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions among family medicine residency program managers. Int J Med Educ. 2020;11:47\u0026ndash;53.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBakker AB, Demerouti E. The Job Demands-Resources model: state of the art. J Managerial Psychol. 2007;22(3):309\u0026ndash;28.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBakker AB, Demerouti E. Towards a model of work engagement. Career Dev Int. 2008;13(3):209\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKnight C, Patterson M, Dawson J. Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. J Organ Behav. 2017;38(6):792\u0026ndash;812.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol. 2000;55(1):68\u0026ndash;78.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNicuta EG, Diaconu-Gherasim LR, Constantin T. How trait gratitude relates to teachers' burnout and work engagement: job demands and resources as mediators. Curr Psychol. 2022:1\u0026ndash;10.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKomase Y, Watanabe K, Sasaki N, Kawakami N. The Effect of Perceived Gratitude From Others on Work Engagement: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2021;63(9):e592\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKomase Y, Akiyama H, Kawakami N. Effects of the Collective Gratitude on Work Engagement: A Multilevel Cross-sectional Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2022;64(11):e729\u0026ndash;35.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKomase Y, Watanabe K, Imamura K, Kawakami N. Effects of a Newly Developed Gratitude Intervention Program on Work Engagement Among Japanese Workers: A Pre- and Posttest Study. J Occup Environ Med. 2019;61(9):e378\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFredrickson BL, Branigan C. Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Cogn Emot. 2005;19(3):313\u0026ndash;32.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHollingsworth JC, Redden DT. Tiny Habits((R)) for Gratitude-Implications for Healthcare Education Stakeholders. Front Public Health. 2022;10:866992.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKomase Y, Watanabe K, Sasaki N, Kawakami N. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Gratitude at Work Scale (GAWS). J Occup Health. 2020;62(1):e12185.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIkeda H. Gratitude in Organizations: Its Function via Expression and Sharing in the Workplace. Trans Acad Association Organizational Sci. 2015;4(1):120\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKomase Y, Watanabe K, Hori D, Nozawa K, Hidaka Y, Iida M, et al. Effects of gratitude intervention on mental health and well-being among workers: A systematic review. J Occup Health. 2021;63(1):e12290.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCunha LF, Pellanda LC, Reppold CT. Positive Psychology and Gratitude Interventions: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Front Psychol. 2019;10:584.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCzyzowska N, Gurba E. Enhancing Meaning in Life and Psychological Well-Being Among a European Cohort of Young Adults via a Gratitude Intervention. Front Psychol. 2021;12:751081.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNawa NE, Yamagishi N. Distinct associations between gratitude, self-esteem, and optimism with subjective and psychological well-being among Japanese individuals. BMC Psychol. 2024;12(1):130.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFukuzaki T, Iwata N. Association between the five-factor model of personality and work engagement: a meta-analysis. Ind Health. 2022;60(2):154\u0026ndash;63.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFaul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFaul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149\u0026ndash;60.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB, Salanova M, Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Rom\u0026aacute; V, Bakker AB. The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Happiness Studies: Interdisciplinary Forum Subjective Well-Being. 2002;3(1):71\u0026ndash;92.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB. B. BA. UTRECHT Work Engagement Scale (UWES) - Test Manuals2003. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/tests/#engagement\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/tests/#engagement\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaufeli WB, Bakker AB, Salanova M. The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educ Psychol Meas. 2006;66(4):701\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShimazu A, Schaufeli WB, Kosugi S, Suzuki A, Nashiwa H, Kato A, et al. Work engagement in Japan: Validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Appl Psychology: Int Rev. 2008;57(3):510\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIkeda H, Morinaga Y. Developing a Measure of Multi-faceted Work Motivations in Japanese Organizations. Japanese Association Industrial/Organizational Psychol J. 2017;30(2):171\u0026ndash;86.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrick MR, Stewart GL, Piotrowski M. Personality and job performance: test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales representatives. J Appl Psychol. 2002;87(1):43\u0026ndash;51.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCullough ME, Emmons RA, Tsang JA. The grateful disposition: a conceptual and empirical topography. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002;82(1):112\u0026ndash;27.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSumi K. Reliability and Construct Validity of the Gratitude Questionnaire 6 Item Form (GQ 6) in a Sample of Japanese College Students. J Posit Psychol Wellbeing. 2017;1(2):73\u0026ndash;84.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShiraki Y. Development of the Japanese version of the trait gratitude scale. Japanese J Interpers social Psychol. 2014;14:27\u0026ndash;33.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKobayashi F. Development and validation of the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ) in Japanese undergraduate students. Comp Cult J Miyazaki Int Coll. 2013;18:2\u0026ndash;19.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavis MH. A Multidimensional Approach to Individual Differences in Empathy. JSAS Catalog Sel Documents Psychol. 1980;10:85.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1983;44(1):113\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHimichi T, Osanai H, Goto T, Fujita H, Kawamura Y, et al. Development of a Japanese version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Japanese J Psychol. 2017;88(1):61\u0026ndash;71.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDiener E, Emmons RA, Larsen RJ, Griffin S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. J Pers Assess. 1985;49(1):71\u0026ndash;5.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDiener E. Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull. 1984;95(3):542\u0026ndash;75.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyff CD. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J Personal Soc Psychol. 1989;57(6):1069\u0026ndash;81.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRyff CD, Kitayam S, Karasawa M, Markus H, Kawakami N, Coe C. Survey of Midlife in Japan (MIDJA). April-September 2008. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]; 2018.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCosta PT, McCrae RR, Shimonaka Y, Nakazato K, Gondou Y, Takayama M. NEO-PI-R, NEO-FFI manual for the Japanease version. Tokyo Shinri, Tokyo, Japan; 2011.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHiguchi K. A Two-Step Approach to Quantitative Content Analysis: KH Coder Tutorial using Anne of Green Gables (Part I). Ritsumeikan social Sci Rev. 2016;52(3):77\u0026ndash;91.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHiguchi K. A Two-Step Approach to Quantitative Content Analysis: KH Coder Tutorial using Anne of Green Gables (Part II). Ritsumeikan social Sci Rev. 2017;53(1):137\u0026ndash;47.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med. 2010;8:18.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGreenacre MJ. Correspondence analysis in practice. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman \u0026amp; Hall/CRC; 2007. xiii, 280 p.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFenigstein A, Levine MP. Self-attention, concept activation, and the causal self. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1984;20(3):231\u0026ndash;45.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMor N, Winquist J. Self-focused attention and negative affect: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2002;128(4):638\u0026ndash;62.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSohal M, Singh P, Dhillon BS, Gill HS. Efficacy of journaling in the management of mental illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fam Med Community Health. 2022;10(1).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuo L. The delayed, durable effect of expressive writing on depression, anxiety and stress: A meta-analytic review of studies with long-term follow-ups. Br J Clin Psychol. 2023;62(1):272\u0026ndash;97.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSutton A. Measuring the Effects of Self-Awareness: Construction of the Self-Awareness Outcomes Questionnaire. Eur J Psychol. 2016;12(4):645\u0026ndash;58.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarkin B, Webb TL, Chang BP, Prestwich A, Conner M, Kellar I, et al. Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull. 2016;142(2):198\u0026ndash;229.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eZhang Y, Li M, Chieh Y, Han S. On a path to becoming more self-regulated: Reflective journals' impact on Chinese English as a foreign language students' self-regulated writing strategy use. Front Psychol. 2022;13:1042031.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEpp S. The value of reflective journaling in undergraduate nursing education: a literature review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2008;45(9):1379\u0026ndash;88.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYamanaka T, Nawa NE, Yamagishi N. Gratitude and Academic Motivation among Japanese High School Students: A Nine-week Gratitude Journal Intervention Study. PsyArXiv. 2022.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCorona K, Senft N, Campos B, Chen C, Shiota M, Chentsova-Dutton YE. Ethnic variation in gratitude and well-being. Emotion. 2020;20(3):518\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChopik WJ, Newton NJ, Ryan LH, Kashdan TB, Jarden AJ. Gratitude across the life span: Age differences and links to subjective well-being. J Posit Psychol. 2019;14(3):292\u0026ndash;302.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLatkin CA, Edwards C, Davey-Rothwell MA, Tobin KE. The relationship between social desirability bias and self-reports of health, substance use, and social network factors among urban substance users in Baltimore, Maryland. Addict Behav. 2017;73:133\u0026ndash;6.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTourangeau R, Yan T. Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(5):859\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShibaoka M, Masuda M, Iwasawa S, Ikezawa S, Eguchi H, Nakagome K. Relationship between objective cognitive functioning and work performance among Japanese workers. J Occup Health. 2023;65(1):e12385.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Gratitude, Work Engagement, Gratitude Journaling, Online Intervention, Psychological Assessment, Text Analysis, Job Demands-Resources Model","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eGratitude interventions have shown various psychological benefits, including enhanced motivation in academic settings. However, their impact on work engagement - a key factor in employee well-being and organizational performance - remains underexplored. This study examined whether a 12-day online gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement and increases awareness of job resources, based on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 100 Japanese employees (mean age\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;41.0\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.2 years, evenly split by gender) were randomly assigned to a gratitude journal group or a daily life journal group (control). Participants in the gratitude journal group recorded things they felt grateful for, while the control group documented daily occurrences. Work engagement was assessed using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), alongside measures of work motivation, gratitude disposition, perspective-taking, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being. Journal entries were analyzed using word frequency and correspondence analysis to examine whether gratitude journaling enhanced awareness of job resources.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e Participants in the gratitude journal group exhibited a significant increase in work engagement (total score and absorption dimension) post-intervention, supporting the idea that gratitude journaling enhances engagement. Journal content analysis revealed that gratitude journaling was associated with greater recognition of job resources, such as social support, suggesting a mechanism through which gratitude influences work engagement. Both groups showed increases in gratitude disposition, life satisfaction, and competitive-oriented work motivation, suggesting possible broader journaling benefits. In contrast, the daily life journal group experienced temporary declines in purpose in life and autonomy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study provides experimental evidence that gratitude journaling enhances work engagement by increasing awareness of job resources, integrating gratitude into the JD-R Model. The findings suggest that gratitude must be actively cultivated rather than assumed to arise naturally. Given its accessibility and low cost, gratitude journaling offers a promising tool for organizations to foster employee engagement. Future research should examine its long-term effects and evaluate its applicability across diverse cultural contexts.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-04-10 05:03:08","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5502091/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-05-07T05:29:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-05-01T11:57:53+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"277126088365906745653132423812035379704","date":"2025-04-14T14:32:54+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-04-08T07:14:02+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-04-08T01:33:07+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychology","date":"2025-04-06T03:01:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"psyo","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychology](http://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"BMC Psychology","twitterHandle":"BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"60cd515a-8b80-4b5b-8932-6278a200cff2","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 10th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-10-13T16:00:16+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-5502091","link":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03494-2","journal":{"identity":"bmc-psychology","isVorOnly":false,"title":"BMC Psychology"},"publishedOn":"2025-10-06 15:57:20","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 6th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-04-10 05:03:08","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1186/s40359-025-03494-2","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03494-2","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5502091","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5502091","identity":"rs-5502091","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}